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.
-Ted
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 <tr...@redhat.com> 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.
Thoughts?
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.
-Ted
On 12/18/2012 07:22 AM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
Do you have something in mind to put there?
--Rafael
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Ted Ross <tr...@redhat.com> wrote:
We've added a contrib directory under proton-j. Does anyone object to
putting one in the proton-c directory as well?
-Ted
