On 01/06/07, Arnaud Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As I said, we would not define the NMS API as we do not change the JMS API. We would only implement it.
But we do currently extend JMS, through the use of eg org.apache.qpid.jms.Session extends javax.jms.Session.
I don think that implementing NMS would impact upon interop. An I agree with you that having an API isn't enough but again I am suggesting that we define it but that we implement it. Moreover this code should not even be hosted by our project but rather on the NMS Apache project.
But to implement it we need a clear understanding of the precise semantics. If they are defined to be "exactly the same as JMS" (which itself is open to interpretation in a few areas!) then that is a start I suppose notwithstanding the legal issues with that. Does WCF sit easily on top of NMS? If we have Qpid-specific extensions can they be exposed elegantly with that model? RG
