Hi Clebert, That sounds very interesting! Bringing the HornetQ community into ActiveMQ would be exciting for me. We could collaborate and bring together the best features of ActiveMQ, Apollo and HornetQ to create an amazing next generation messaging system AND grow our developer community at the same time. Lots of folks have been asking me when will ActiveMQ get JMS 2.0 support, so the fact that HornetQ has JMS 2.0 support already is big plus in my book!
I was building up the Apollo codebase to be that next generation messaging backbone for ActiveMQ, but perhaps because it's mostly implemented using Scala, not too many developers got involved and that's a bit of a problem since the 'Apache Way' of building projects is more about community than code. I have been pondering porting Apollo to be just plain Java based. Since HornetQ is Java based but and has a similar fully async threading architecture like Apollo, perhaps this donation will save me lots of work. :) On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > My name is Clebert Suconic, I'm the project lead for the HornetQ JMS broker > (http://hornetq.jboss.org/). The HornetQ team is currently in the planning > phase for the next release of the broker and we've been thinking about > whether it would make sense for us to collaborate more closely with the > ActiveMQ community. > > There is a lot of overlap in the capabilities of the two brokers today and > it strikes us that it would be beneficial to both communities for us to join > forces to build one truly great JMS broker rather than spend our time > duplicating efforts on both brokers. ActiveMQ has a great community of > developers and users and it'd be great to be able to consolidate our work > there. > > My understanding is that the Apollo sub-project aimed to provide a basis for > the next generation of ActiveMQ, addressing some of the current limitations. > Perhaps HornetQ could be an alternative. HornetQ has some good performance > and scalability numbers as well as support for JMS 2.0. It already supports > STOMP today and adding support for OpenWire would be straight-forward and > would provide continuity for existing clients. Essentially, the goal could > be to combine the existing flexibility of ActiveMQ with the performance of > HornetQ. > > Anyway, these are just some initial ideas, for now I'm really just > interested to know how the ActiveMQ community would feel about a donation of > the HornetQ codebase. > > Thanks and best regards, > Clebert. -- Hiram Chirino Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. hchir...@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
