I don't agree with the presumption that ActiveMQ *needs* a *new* broker. Nor with the argument that it will die out if it doesn't get one.
Whole-sale replacement is hard. I worked in a company that *still* uses technology dating back to 1980 because several efforts to whole-sale replace the existing platform failed. That approach is hard. Note that I am not arguing that it's impossible, but this does make me concerned that even with the AMQ-6 name, HornetQ may fail to replace ActiveMQ - even as it continues as a completely successful product of its own. With all of that said, if it proves that ActiveMQ dies out without a new broker, I am alright with that. As mentioned before, if HornetQ takes over the market, I don't see that as a bad thing and look forward to the opportunity to contribute there, or move on to other things. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-HornetQ-ActiveMQ-s-next-generation-tp4693781p4693983.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
