2015-04-09 3:59 GMT+02:00 James Carman <[email protected]>: > I am trying to understand the picture that has been painted for us thus > far. Maybe you can help me. First of all, the argument for why we need to > start from the HornetQ code base is because the current core broker is in > such disrepair that we can't fix it (and some feel that we should thank our > lucky stars these guys came along when they did to save us all from our own > incompetence). Now we are being told that our opinions really shouldn't > matter and we should just blindly trust the folks who made it that way > (they wrote most of the code, right) when they tell us that this is the > right thing to do for the future of ActiveMQ? >
I'm simply trying to make a point about *my* opinion (I don't think I've ever said *we* or anything like that would lead people to think *my* opinion is the only valid one). I personally don't feel I have the knowledge to judge whether the current broker can be evolved into a next generation non-blocking broker. I also don't have the time and will to improve that knowledge up to the point I could can form my own opinion on this technical issue. Software technologies do evolve, so implying the current architecture is bad now so that the people that wrote it years ago are to blame for it does not look like a valid argument to me. That's judging past decisions in the light of the present knowledge and possibilities. > > Now, please don't take this as my opinion. I have nothing but respect for > the folks you mentioned as well as the other folks who have contributed to > this project. I'm just trying to point out how the arguments seem to > contradict one another. > > On Wednesday, April 8, 2015, Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I think most of the code has been written over the years by James, Rob, > > Hiram, Garry, Dejan and Tim. I can't speak for them, but I don't recall > > having read anything from them that could lead me to believe they were in > > any way reluctant about replacing the activemq broker with the one from > the > > hornetq donation. Rather the opposite, and I certainly trust them on the > > technical side... > > > > 2015-04-08 22:33 GMT+02:00 Tracy Snell <[email protected]>: > > > > > Who are in the 90% club and are they really all on board with the new > > > broker? > > > > > > > On Apr 8, 2015, at 3:52 PM, Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > In this very case, I think this is a technical decision, and my trust > > > > clearly goes to the ones that know and wrote 90% of the code, and > when > > > they > > > > all seem to say the "hornetq" broker should replace the activemq 5 > > one, > > > I > > > > don't see why I should give it any more second thoughts. > > > > > > > > >
