On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Marnie McCormack
<marnie.mccorm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure what the best solution is, but I do know that I'm missing what
> the problem using one of the Apache projects for this work is ?
>
> It seems like there some context missing from this debate, possibly from
> discussions at the F2F.
>
> Bruce - can you elaborate on why other people might not want to work on AMQP
> under an Apache project but would want to work on it as another open source
> project and use an ASL license ?
Why would someone who works on an AMQP broker implementation that is
not Qpid want to come to the Qpid project to contribute to an AMQP
protocol level client? If this project were hosted as a subproject to
Qpid, it would forever be associated with Qpid instead of being
neutral from any broker.
> It seems a little like double overhead for those already working on Qpid or
> ActiveMQ to have a third project in the loop, with different lists and
> process and all that. Having been around for a while I understand the
> overhead with Apache, but I'm also concerned that we haven't really talked
> about what we gain from a non-Apache project - what the gain from doing the
> core libraries somewhere else ?
Because it lowers the barrier of participation and is not associated
with any particular AMQP impl.
Bruce
--
perl -e 'print
unpack("u30","D0G)u8...@4vyy9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
);'
ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org
