Hi Alan,
-Alan Conway wrote: -
> I plan to start working on a "go" binding for proton. I
> envisage a SWIG binding similar to the other swig-based bindings
> (python, ruby, etc.) and an API layer similar to the new reactive
> Python API (based on the C reactor.)
>
> This will be an explo
http://golang.org/cmd/cgo/
:/
--
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
Robbie Gemmell created PROTON-830:
-
Summary: [IGNORE ME] GitHub integration test
Key: PROTON-830
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-830
Project: Qpid Proton
Issue Type: Bug
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-830?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14338197#comment-14338197
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on PROTON-830:
---
GitHub user gemmellr opened a pull request:
GitHub user gemmellr opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/9
PROTON-830: trivial README change, testing GitHub integration
As per the subject.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/gemmellr/qp
Testing responses via email.
On 26 February 2015 at 10:25, gemmellr wrote:
> GitHub user gemmellr opened a pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/9
>
> PROTON-830: trivial README change, testing GitHub integration
>
> As per the subject.
>
> You can merge this pu
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-830?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14338206#comment-14338206
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on PROTON-830:
---
Github user gemmellr commented on the pull
Github user gemmellr commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/9#issuecomment-76155471
Testing reply via GitHub
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have
On 25 February 2015 at 18:40, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 10:27 +0100, Jakub Scholz wrote:
>> ...
>> But I find this part a bit dangerous:
>> "Classically in protocols where SASL was not optional the way to avoid
>> double authentication was to use the EXTERNAL SASL mechanism. W
Always remember the newline to protect against automated signatures? :)
On 26 February 2015 at 09:46, Dominic Evans wrote:
> http://golang.org/cmd/cgo/
>
> :/
>
> --
> Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
> 741598.
> Registered
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-829?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14338377#comment-14338377
]
Rafael H. Schloming commented on PROTON-829:
I added that code to get the pyth
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-828?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14338532#comment-14338532
]
ASF subversion and git services commented on PROTON-828:
Commit 26
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-829?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14338534#comment-14338534
]
Alan Conway commented on PROTON-829:
Thanks for the info, I agree that it is not clear
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Andrew Stitcher
wrote:
> If it is ok with them I will copy the comments over there:
> Alan, Jakub?
>
Sorry, I missed the wiki part. Feel free to copy my comment there if you
want.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-828?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ken Giusti resolved PROTON-828.
---
Resolution: Fixed
> Python binding does not support MODIFIED delivery state
>
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-829?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14338658#comment-14338658
]
Rafael H. Schloming commented on PROTON-829:
What really motivates the current
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-829?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14338757#comment-14338757
]
Alan Conway commented on PROTON-829:
Found the fix to the qpid problem as follows, I t
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-829?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Alan Conway updated PROTON-829:
---
Assignee: Rafael H. Schloming (was: Alan Conway)
> Possible reference counting bug in pn_clear_tpwork
On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 12:28 +, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> ...
> I'm going to post my comments here and on the wiki, as I dont think
> many (except maybe you) will actually see them on the wiki ;)
Thank you for the excellent feedback. I'm going to answer on the wiki -
as it'll save me from cutting
Test 2 reply via email
On 26 Feb 2015 10:28, "Robbie Gemmell" wrote:
> Testing responses via email.
>
> On 26 February 2015 at 10:25, gemmellr wrote:
> > GitHub user gemmellr opened a pull request:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/9
> >
> > PROTON-830: trivial README ch
On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 17:00 -0500, Richard Li wrote:
> +1
>
> Have you thought about how to integrate Go channels with AMQP links?
>
I have thought that it seems like a Cool Idea, but I haven't got much
further than that yet :)
> Richard
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Alan Conway wrote
On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 09:39 +, Dominic Evans wrote:
> Hi Alan,
>
> -Alan Conway wrote: -
> > I plan to start working on a "go" binding for proton. I
> > envisage a SWIG binding similar to the other swig-based bindings
> > (python, ruby, etc.) and an API layer similar to the new react
On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 13:43 -0500, Alan Conway wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 09:39 +, Dominic Evans wrote:
> > Hi Alan,
> >
> > -Alan Conway wrote: -
> > > I plan to start working on a "go" binding for proton. I
> > > envisage a SWIG binding similar to the other swig-based bindings
On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 13:45 -0500, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 15:48 -0500, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
> > ...
> > If you are at all interested please go and look at the proposal and
> > comment on it there.
>
> Thank you very much to Alan and Jakub for commenting on my proposal.
>
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 9:23 PM, Cliff Jansen wrote:
> Two usage cases, very desirable in Proton, happen to be mostly trivial
> on POSIX but mostly non-trivial on Windows: multi-threading and
> external loops. Proton io and selector classes are POSIX-y in look
> and feel, but IO completion ports
On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 15:09 -0500, Rafael Schloming wrote:
> ...
> It sounds like one way or another we need at least some design changes. I
> don't think it's workable to have overlapping/close but distinct semantics
> for the API on different platforms (e.g. you can move sockets on one
> platform
This is from Andrew's wiki comment. Sorry to paste it back to the list, but
I'm having some difficulty commenting there:
>
>1. Setters with no getters
>Philosophically I don't agree that you need to make all properties
>read/write. I see no particular reason to make these properties re
27 matches
Mail list logo
