With JMS/NMS it's more likely to do with Copyright. The question is "Is NMS derived from JMS", not about other aspects of IP, but we need a lawyers comment.
If the API looked substantially different from JMS there probably wouldn't be an issue. Since JMS is not the greatest messaging API in the world, imho, why do other languages have to suffer from it? Not everyone using these other languages has seen JMS. Given AMQP (above rant aside) was engineered to be cross platform/language - why not start with a fairly thin AMQP-centric API? Then on top of it build JMS, WCF, etc... JMS by no means the only shape for a messaging API. Just my 2c John On 11/06/07, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I share the same sentiment. The 'tainting' assumptions that are being made around the JMS spec need to get resolved ASAP for the sake of both the projects. On 6/11/07, Rupert Smith < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You can not seriously tell me that because you've read the JMS spec you may > not write a spec for a messaging protocol, without breaking the rules of the > JMS spec. This discussion is bordering on the ridiculous. > > On 11/06/07, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 6/11/07, John O'Hara < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > "..please consider that the same folks who developed NMS helped develop > > the > > > AMQP specification so the same alleged 'taint' that is being claimed > > against > > > NMS would also apply to AMQP." > > > > > > To clarify. > > > James is not the source of any of the content of the AMQP specification > > thru > > > v0-9, to the best of my knowledge. > > > > So I've just been through my AMQP spec emails; The first version I was > > sent was 0.3a4 in August 2004 then I contributed to the specification > > up to around April 2005 when it had reached around 0.81a. > > > > So what happened to the specification I worked on? Was a new group > > formed excluding all the folks who were on the mailing list I was on > > (including yourself John you were on the mailing list with me) and > > were all versions of AMQP destroyed and a new cleanroom version > > created after 0.81a, ignoring all that previous work? > > > > -- > > James > > ------- > > http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ > > > -- Regards, Hiram Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
