Yes, but the content I'm talking about is just libraries (and headers). Actual applications like routers, proxies, brokers, etc. would live in Qpid. I can put these libraries in qpid/extras just as easily. That's why I'm asking the question.


On 12/18/2012 09:29 AM, William Henry wrote:
It thought the idea of proton was for the libraries and language API wrappers 
only. Why doesn't everything else just move into Qpid proper.

There is a danger that proton becomes its own AMQP project otherwise. No?

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 18, 2012, at 6:54 AM, Ted Ross <> wrote:

Yes, I'm looking for a place to contribute the server/container work I've been 
doing.  The candidates are qpid/extras or proton-c/contrib.  Since this work is 
really an extension of proton-c, it seems that the proton tree might be the 
better candidate.


The server/container code provides two APIs to supplement the proton-c engine 
API.  The server interface provides multi-threaded support for applications 
using proton engine.  It's features include:

* Guaranteed non-reentrancy for specific connections
* Hooks for thread-based tuning (processor/numa affinity, etc.)
* OS signal handling
* Server quiesce/resume
* Incoming listeners and outgoing connections (resilient, with re-connect)
* Timers
* Integration with user file-descriptors (FDs used for purposes other
   than AMQP)

The container interface provides a means by which node types and node instances 
can be managed.  It allows application developers to write node-type-specific 
handlers for:

* delivery send, receive, update (disposition)
* link create, delete, writable

The container allows static and dynamic provisioning of nodes.


On 12/18/2012 07:22 AM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
Do you have something in mind to put there?


On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Ted Ross <> wrote:

We've added a contrib directory under proton-j.  Does anyone object to
putting one in the proton-c directory as well?


Reply via email to