BTW, I've created the mailing list on google groups that was suggested on earlier posts:
Group home page: http://groups.google.com/group/amqp-client-dev I think it would be a good idea to move this discussion there since this thread is getting cross posted across a couple groups who's interest level varies. If this topic is of interest to you please join the discussion there. On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 9:01 AM, Rajith Attapattu <rajit...@gmail.com> wrote: > Frankly I am a bit baffled about the concerns raised here. > > Rob, Bruce, Rafi and a few individuals have expressed a desire to > start an amqp protocol client project that is independent of any AMQP > projects that already exist. > The goal is to enable collaboration from anybody who is interested in > AMQP and to avoid duplication of effort. > To this end Bruce has extended an invitation to the developers in the > Qpid/ActiveMQ communities to participate in this. > > **Also as Rob mentioned, it's upto the Qpid/ActiveMQ communities to > use these client libs or not.** - However common sense suggests that > we stand to be benefit if we use it, provided that it's designed > properly which I am sure it will be. > > If we think pragmatically, there are many good reasons why such a > project needs to be independent instead of being affiliated with an > existing AMQP project. > > 1. All though Qpid, ActiveMQ, RabbitMQ etc.. are open source projects, > they all have their own identity, their own communities, different > companies backing them etc. > If this proposed project goes under any of the existing projects > then it is inevitable that people will feel that the chosen community > will have more influence over the project than the others. > This is not a good thing ! > > 2. If this project is independent, then we will likely get > participation from a wider audience, not just folks from the above > mentioned communities. > > 3. It is IMO absurd to require a RabbitMQ developer to earn karma in > the Qpid/ActiveMQ project to contribute effectively to this project. > > Regards, > > Rajith > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 4:04 AM, Robert Godfrey <rob.j.godf...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> On 11 June 2010 08:48, Bruce Snyder <bruce.sny...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> 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. >> >> Moreover those people would not find it possible to commit without >> gaining committership to the relevant Apache project. I was talking >> this evening to one of the guys from RabbitMQ who would very much want >> to be involved in this - and I very much want to encourage this. >> >> I think we should see this idea as something that may be of interest >> to particular Qpid, ActiveMQ, Rabbit or other developers... not >> something that involves those projects in themselves. In the future >> those projects may decide to adopt work that is done in this space (or >> not)... but really what we are saying is that we feel like there are a >> number of people from different communities who feel like it would be >> worthwhile to have a go at this - and we're seeing how many other like >> minded folks there are. There are, of course, also likely to be >> developers in these communities to whom this is of no interest >> whatsoever. >> >>> >>>> 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. >>> >> >> +1 I think it was a great sign that so many people from different >> communities were willing to try to start up something like this - and >> obviously if there are more people out there that will be even >> better... I really want to do as much as possible to encourage this >> effort and lower the barriers of entry for anyone who is interested as >> much as possible >> >> -- Rob >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation >> Project: http://qpid.apache.org >> Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org >> >> > > > > -- > Regards, > > Rajith Attapattu > Red Hat > http://rajith.2rlabs.com/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation > Project: http://qpid.apache.org > Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org > > -- Regards, Hiram Blog: http://hiramchirino.com Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation Project: http://qpid.apache.org Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org
