On 06/04/2018 06:59 PM, Ken Dreyer wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 8:30 AM, Jeremy Cline wrote:
>> I had a hard time justifying choosing STOMP over AMQP because most
>> brokers just map the other protocol they focus on onto STOMP. It's true
>> the the spec is short, but it leaves a lot up to indiv
> It's nice to give the flexibility to clients by exposing both. I
> haven't seen a problem with topic matching in my experience so far.
While I like the idea of adding flexibility, it'll probably also be
harder on the debugging and maintenance side of things. We will keep
the ZeroMQ gateway for e
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 8:30 AM, Jeremy Cline wrote:
> I had a hard time justifying choosing STOMP over AMQP because most
> brokers just map the other protocol they focus on onto STOMP. It's true
> the the spec is short, but it leaves a lot up to individual
> implementations as far as I can tell (l
On 06/01/2018 05:45 PM, Michael Bonnet wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 12:51 PM, Jeremy Cline wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 05/29/2018 09:31 AM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Aurelien Bompard <
>>> abomp...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>>>
What do you think of this
On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 12:51 PM, Jeremy Cline wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 05/29/2018 09:31 AM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Aurelien Bompard <
> > abomp...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> What do you think of this proposal? Any blind spots?
> >>
> >
> > Not that I d
Hi,
On 05/29/2018 09:31 AM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Aurelien Bompard <
> abomp...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> What do you think of this proposal? Any blind spots?
>>
>
> Not that I disagree, but please add/expand a section as to why AMQP (and
> RabbitMQ) wa
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Aurelien Bompard <
abomp...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
> What do you think of this proposal? Any blind spots?
>
Not that I disagree, but please add/expand a section as to why AMQP (and
RabbitMQ) was chosen over other messaging technologies.
--
Jeff Ollie
The m
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 10:16 AM, Aurelien Bompard
wrote:
> What do you think of this proposal? Any blind spots?
> Thanks!
This sounds like a great idea. I use ActiveMQ and RabbitMQ at work,
and both are good choices for brokers. Sounds like you're going
towards RabbitMQ.
- Ken
_
Follow-up to this, Patrick had a few questions on IRC, which I've copied
here and answered in case others are interested:
> I was wondering whether you intend to continue cryptographically
> (x509) signing messages, or if you were planning to enforce sender per
> subject in another way?
Ultimatel
Hey folks!
Jeremy and I have been working on a proposal to migrate fedmsg from our
current brokerless architecture to a broker-based architecture.
The overview and reasons for the migration are described on this page:
https://fedmsg-migration-tools.readthedocs.io/en/latest/migration/overview.html
10 matches
Mail list logo
