Qpid-ians,
We've been talking for a while now about interop testing and how the
project members can become quite 'silo-ed' in their language of choice
(I know I've made more than one change to the spec file that broke the
C++, sorry).
I'd like to know what everyone's opinion was on a reshuffle of the svn
code. I think that we might be able to get away from our 'silos' be
breaking the project by function not implementation. It should allow
us to break the ties between client and broker implementations such
has developed (out of necessity) for the java code base.
I like to think that in developing 0-10 (and beyond) with the possible
introduction of a common API across all languages (as is being
discussed on another thread) it may make it easier for one developer
to apply the same bugfix/improvement across multiple language
implementations, or at least add in a comment place holder pointing to
the JIRA.
I know it may be a real pain but as we have a brief break between
deciding what the next AMQP version to push forward with is we have a
rare opportunity to do this setting us up for the future.
It might even allow us to do some interesting things such as create
shared libraries between languages, like a high speed c++ framing lib
that can be used in the java via JNI.
The thinking was something along the lines of:
broker
qpidc
qpidj
...
client
qpid.net
qpidc
qpidj
qpidpy
qpidr
common
qpidc
qpidj
management
qpidc
qpidj
qpidjmx
...
spec
gentools
--
Martin Ritchie
