2009/11/30 Robert Godfrey <rob.j.godf...@gmail.com>: > I'm not sure how useful a metric this is as I would argue that none of our > .net clients have been completely production ready (as Rafi pointed out > earlier).
That must be a contender for the understatement of the month prize on this mailing list... > Furthermore my understanding was that the client currently being > developed cannot easily be ported to run on .net platforms other than > Windows (i.e. it will no be available to users of Mono) and therefore cannot > completely supersede the existing C# based client in that way . I am not sure why this would be the case. I have never attempted to use WCF on Mono but from the project page it does sound like a lot of it is implemented, and probably enough to get the Qpid channel working: http://www.mono-project.com/WCF There is some of C++ in the qpid channel too, which clearly isn't portable but from a quick glance at it, it doesn't look like it would be beyond a suitably motivated individual to make it cross-platform. > I'm very supportive of the efforts to make available a WCF client for Qpid > (and more generally, I hope, for AMQP) however I think we need to look a > little more carefully about how we are going to go forward supporting .net > application programmers and - something that tends to get a little lost - > how we enable .net programmers to interoperate seamlessly with clients using > other APIs (for example JMS <-> .net/WCF).. I think this is something where WCF's flexibility be shown to be a good thing, but I'll leave someone more qualified than I am to give a definitive answer. I agree that the mapping needs to be documented, and any WCF behaviours etc standardised. RG --------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation Project: http://qpid.apache.org Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org
