Gordon Sim wrote:
On 05/10/2010 09:33 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Author: tross
Date: Mon May 10 20:33:19 2010
New Revision: 942892
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=942892&view=rev
Log:
QPID-2589 - Applied patch from Chuck Rolke.
This commit adds a new component and yet another approach for .net,
specifically a .net wrapper around the c++ messaging API.
We also have a wcf client (this also uses some c++ code, but uses the
0-10 specific API plus some direct use of the internals of the client),
and two different pure c# clients for 0-8 and 0-10 respectively.
Four different options each with its own codebase isn't sensible. We
can't maintain them all and it is confusing for users.
While aspects of this latest approach certainly appeal to me personally
(the messaging API is better for a number of reasons than the older API
and wrapping that also keeps the clients more aligned conceptually), I
think it deserves a bit more debate. Specifically we have to explicitly
decide as a community whether this new approach is a path we should
pursue. I'm keen to hear the thoughts of Cliff, Aidan and other .net
aficionados.
While I prefer depending on the new C++ messaging API to depending on
the old one, I don't think either one is really the correct choice. I
think the WCF client should actually depend on a C# interface to the
message API, thus giving something that is more reasonable to use
directly from C#, while being able to be back-ended by either the C++
implementation of the messaging API or by a pure C# implementation if
one is so inclined to write one.
On purely procedural note, it is IMHO *very* bad form to drop such a
patch into the repo without some list discussion prior. I'm particularly
uncomfortable that this was committed by someone who (as far as I'm
aware) is not a regular WCF committer, nor intends to become one.
This has been the general approach in this area since the first dotnet
effort ages ago. It's no wonder there are 4 completely different
approaches half of which are rotting. Cleaning out the rot is only half
the problem here, we *really* have to stop doing stuff like this or
we'll keep on making more rot.
IMHO this patch should be backed out until some discussion has happened
and its clear that those responsible for maintaining WCF going forward
are comfortable with the approach.
--Rafael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]
