How to bootstrap this.. who will make the initial import? >From my understanding we need the repository created before we can have access for it.
We are moving our attention towards the new repository gradually. Having it created will help us speed up the process. On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 5:29 AM, Dejan Bosanac <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 for activemq6 as well. > > Regards > -- > Dejan Bosanac > ---------------------- > Red Hat, Inc. > [email protected] > Twitter: @dejanb > Blog: http://sensatic.net > ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/ > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Clebert Suconic <[email protected] > > > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > I like the activemq6 idea better too > > > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > activemq-6 sounds good. It's also consistent with other things that > > > happened the past (like the transition from smx 3 to 4). > > > > > > I am not sure if a branch is better or a separate repo. Since we're > > > already on git, my preference would be the latter. > > > > > > Hadrian > > > > > > > > > On 10/07/2014 04:59 AM, Richard Kettelerij wrote: > > > > > >> Or morph HornetQ (and parts of Apollo) into a new branch and call it > > >> ActiveMQ 6 right away. Just my 0.02ct > > >> > > >> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Hiram Chirino <[email protected] > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Well, we can put it in a new repo/jira. What should we call it? Keep > > >>> it hornetq? Is the hornetq brand also being donated to the ASF? > > >>> > > >>> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> I gave this quite a bit of thought. I suspect using the same code > name > > >>>> (apollo) would create a lot of undesired confusion. First it'd be > hard > > >>>> to > > >>>> differentiate between the issue/bug reports. Which "apollo" does it > > >>>> refer > > >>>> to? Second, even more dangerous, the word will go out that apollo is > > no > > >>>> longer maintained with potentially negative consequences for > hornet's > > >>>> adoption. More I think about it, stronger I feel against (re)using > the > > >>>> apollo codename. > > >>>> > > >>>> Just my $0.02, > > >>>> Hadrian > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On 10/03/2014 01:56 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Yeah that will work. Perhaps it would be easiest to import the > code > > >>>>> into a branch in the apollo git branch. That way we can continue > to > > >>>>> use apollo codename as the ActiveMQ 'next gen' strategy. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Clebert Suconic > > >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Can't we import the repo as is, and cleanup whatever dependencies > we > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> have > > >>> > > >>>> before a release? There will be a lot of work anyways on making the > > >>>>>> integration? > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Some of these things are external dependencies through maven. We > can > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> just > > >>> > > >>>> clean up anything we have there that already have apache > equivalents. > > >>>>>> (e.g. > > >>>>>> the jms API and other things like that). > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Gary Tully <[email protected]> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> the vote is complete[1], I think we can move forward with the ip > > >>>>>>> clearance > > >>>>>>> work. > > >>>>>>> The best folks to weed out the third party deps from the grant > are > > >>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>> HQ > > >>>>>>> guys > > >>>>>>> maybe it is best to sort out the commit rights so we have > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> knowledgeable > > >>> > > >>>> help with the cleanup. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> [1] > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/activemq-dev/ > > >>> 201409.mbox/%3CCAH+vQmPNDAF4=HCoFuh0w6vNU+9vBHc24Dh9_HXnvm= > > >>> [email protected]%3E > > >>> > > >>>> On 24 September 2014 15:28, Clebert Suconic < > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> [email protected]> > > >>> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> +1 > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> I knew we would have to adapt our dependencies..that will be > part > > of > > >>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>> work after acceptance and before releasing. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Hiram Chirino > > >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> That sounds good to me. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 7:08 AM, Gary Tully < > > [email protected]> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> I think we should complete the 'Copyright' section of the ip > > >>>>>>>>>> clearance[1], run a vote to accept the grant and initial > > >>>>>>>>>> committers > > >>>>>>>>>> and then do the surgery to remove the LPGL deps before > > completing > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> the > > >>> > > >>>> 'Verify distribution rights' section. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/hornetq.html > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On 24 September 2014 11:54, Gary Tully <[email protected]> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> I see #1 and #2 are complete. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> on #3 > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> - there are a bunch of examples and documentation that do not > > >>>>>>>>>>> have > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> apache license header, but this is covered in the code grant. We > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> can > > >>> > > >>>> add licenses as appropriate before a release. > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- otherwise we are in the clear. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> on #4 > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> - There is an issue with jee api jars (jms, jta, ejb etc) > > from > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> jboss > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> under CDDL or GPL - we will need to replace those with the > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> geronimo > > >>> > > >>>> counterparts > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> - The jee resource adapter (.rar) implements a bunch of > > jboss > > >>>>>>>>>>> extension points from ironjacamar-core-api, jboss-jca-api and > > >>>>>>>>>>> jboss-transaction-spi - all LGPL > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- We will need to make a functional version without those > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> extension > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> points. The wildfly specifics will have to live outside apache. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> - there is a hard dependency on jboss-logging-spi (LGPL) > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- This will require some major surgery to extract the > logging > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> into > > >>> > > >>>> a > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> plugin and use possibly slf4j by default. This will touch most > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> every > > >>> > > >>>> file. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> - there is a twitter4j dependency under license[1] that we > can > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> drop > > >>> > > >>>> if > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> necessary. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> In summary, before any of the contributed code is released we > > >>>>>>>>>>> will > > >>>>>>>>>>> need to address these dependencies but they need not hinder a > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> grant > > >>> > > >>>> acceptance. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Gary. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> [1] > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> https://github.com/hornetq/hornetq/blob/master/ > > >>> > distribution/hornetq/src/main/resources/licenses/LICENSE_twitter4j.txt > > >>> > > >>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On 10 July 2014 16:53, Hiram Chirino <[email protected] > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Hi Clebert , > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> This is a far as I've been able to get with the IP clearance > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> form: > > >>> > > >>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/ > > >>> content/ip-clearance/hornetq.xml > > >>> > > >>>> I assumed that what you guys want to donate is the code that > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> currently > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> exists on github master (commit > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 90d43fbc158a0e6e3028c7179dbcf984757b88fb). > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Things we still need to do: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Get Red Hat to file a CCLA with Schedule B filled out > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Get a list of your active committers and make sure they > > have > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> CLAs > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> filed. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> 3) "Check and make sure that for all items included with the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> distribution that is not under the Apache license, we have > the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> right > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> to combine with Apache-licensed code and redistribute" > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 4) Check and make sure that all items depended upon by the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> project > > >>> > > >>>> is > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> covered by one or more of the approved licenses. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 5) Run a VOTE thread to accept the code donation. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I encourage the rest of the ActiveMQ PMC members to help > check > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>> > > >>>> double check items #3 and #4 before doing #5. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Hiram Chirino < > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> I'll start looking into filling out the ip-clearance from. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Gary Tully < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] > > >>> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi Clebert, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the hornetq specJMS numbers are very impressive so from my > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> perspective > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> we would love to have the code base. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> We can then evaluate how best to combine the relative > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> strengths > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Apollo and HornetQ for the next gen ActiveMQ. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please start the process outlined at [1] and we can look > at > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> doing > > >>> > > >>>> an > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> import. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8 July 2014 15:37, Hiram Chirino < > [email protected] > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> 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 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> 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. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] | fusesource.com | redhat.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://redhat.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.garytully.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hiram Chirino > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] | fusesource.com | redhat.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hiram Chirino > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] | fusesource.com | redhat.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>> http://redhat.com > > >>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.garytully.com > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>> http://redhat.com > > >>>>>>>>>> http://blog.garytully.com > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>> Hiram Chirino > > >>>>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. > > >>>>>>>>> [email protected] | fusesource.com | redhat.com > > >>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic > > >>>>>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected] > > >>>>>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>> -- > > >>>>>> Clebert Suconic > > >>>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected] > > >>>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> Hiram Chirino > > >>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. > > >>> [email protected] | fusesource.com | redhat.com > > >>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino > > >>> > > >>> > > > > > > > > > -- > > Clebert Suconic > > http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected] > > http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com > > > -- Clebert Suconic http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected] http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
