Re: Contrib under proton-c?

2012-12-18 Thread Hiram Chirino
+1


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




-- 

**

*Hiram Chirino*

*Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.*

*hchir...@redhat.com hchir...@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com*

*skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirinohttp://twitter.com/hiramchirino
*

*blog: Hiram Chirino's Bit Mojo http://hiramchirino.com/blog/*


Re: Contrib under proton-c?

2012-12-18 Thread Hiram Chirino
I would imagine it's for handy, non-core library bits.  That proton-dump
guy would seem like a prime candidate to move in there.


On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:35 AM, William Henry whe...@redhat.com wrote:

 I too would like to understand what the contrib dirs under proton are for.

 Sent from my iPhone

 On Dec 18, 2012, at 5:23 AM, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu 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
 
 




-- 

**

*Hiram Chirino*

*Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.*

*hchir...@redhat.com hchir...@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com*

*skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirinohttp://twitter.com/hiramchirino
*

*blog: Hiram Chirino's Bit Mojo http://hiramchirino.com/blog/*


Re: Contrib under proton-c?

2012-12-18 Thread Ted Ross

William,

I see them as places to put new contributions so they can be developed 
and evaluated while they look for a more permanent home.


-Ted

On 12/18/2012 08:35 AM, William Henry wrote:

I too would like to understand what the contrib dirs under proton are for.

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 18, 2012, at 5:23 AM, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu 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






Re: Contrib under proton-c?

2012-12-18 Thread Darryl L. Pierce
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 09:43:05AM -0500, Ted Ross wrote:
 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.

Are they artifacts that will ship _with_ Proton once they've baked?

-- 
Darryl L. Pierce, Sr. Software Engineer @ Red Hat, Inc.
Delivering value year after year.
Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/



pgp7p2O5t8nbk.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Contrib under proton-c?

2012-12-18 Thread Ted Ross


On 12/18/2012 02:06 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:

The proton-j/contrib directory was created to hold glue/integration with
established third-party libraries/apis (specifically jms and hawtdispatch).
The fact that hawtdispatch and jms don't want a proton dependency, and
proton doesn't want a jms or hawtdispatch dependency kind of forces the
glue/integration to sit somewhere separate from each, and since it is kind
of silly to have an entirely separate project just for that
glue/integration code, creating a proton-j/contrib made sense. I wouldn't
be opposed to a proton-c/contrib for similar purposes, however what you're
describing sounds different. I'm assuming these libraries have no issue
depending on proton, which makes this use of contrib a kind of incubation,
which begs the question, what is the intent for this stuff once it's
hatched? Is the idea to provide another layer to the proton library itself,
or to provide something that is really an independent library with a
different focus?

If the former is the case then I think we should probably be taking a
careful look at the proposed APIs and understanding in detail what they are
and how they build on what is already there (i.e. not just shoehorn it into
contrib), and in the latter case I would say we should keep incubation to
qpid proper.


I expect that in both cases, the proposed APIs will be looked at in 
detail so that their place in the world can be well understood.


Thanks for all the input.  I think I'll incubate them in qpid/extras.  
If we decide they should live in Proton, we can always move them.  They 
will either move somewhere or die from neglect.


-Ted