* Adam Turoff ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [011120 09:30]: > FWIW, my money is on something POE-like. Matt Sergeant and Kip > Hampton independantly reinvented the idea of DBDs with XML::SAX and > a factory class (borrowing from the Java domain, again). Perhaps > what's *really* missing is something more basic - a reusable > infrastructure for pluggable implementations of a standard interface > (DBD::*, XML::SAX::*, P5EE::Message::*, etc.). Then the > email/SOAP/Jabber/XML-RPC/JMS/stem transport discussion is > effectively moot.
I agree. I think POE is an excellent backbone to build this in. (In fact, when I mentioned my ideas for a message queue at a Pittsburgh.pm meeting a while ago Lenzo said: "Just use POE." :-) The useful thing for our purposes about JMS is that it defines an API for messaging rather than the content or transport of the messages themselves. So I could create a custom message type for delivering SPOPS objects and it could work with an independent SOAP or email delivery system. IMO, it's also useful to define the terms we all use. Message queues are somewhat nebulous things and they are not used as frequently as relational databases or synchonous transfer methods. Chris
