On 07/19/2012 03:57 AM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
For example the core goal of making it easy for applications to speak the protocol will very likely overlap with the existing client APIs that Qpid offers, and not everyone is comfortable with ceding that ground to Proton, or letting there be some amount of overlap.
I think 'ceding ground' is the wrong way to look at this, if this is indeed a view held by some.
I think your notes explained well how the understanding of the API space has improved and deepened as Proton has developed. I myself have asked questions around that, and on how it impacts the existing APIs which were after all developed specifically to support transition to AMQP 1.0.
However asking questions is not opposing anything. We would be foolish to refuse to act upon better understanding of the problem space. That would not be serving the interests of our users. I am fully prepared to consider how the messaging API might evolve or might ultimately be replaced. At this point it seems to me though that we simply need to discuss the ideas more and start including users in those discussions.
We should not let the past constrain the future. We do however have an obligation to our users to have an open dialogue about changes and to collectively seek to make those smooth. That is true for all aspects and will be true for proton itself as it evolves.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
