Robert Greig wrote:
On 07/06/07, Jonathan Robie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If a user wants to use JMS, how does the presence of an alternative
force them to do anything different than what they would do if there is
only one Java API?
The user may want to use JMS. But may not want to preclude using
AMQP-specific functionality at a future date or now but only in some
parts of the codebase. If to use AMQP-specific functionality the user
cannot use "extended JMS" then you are forcing him to choose a
proprietary API.
Of course, "extended JMS" is also a proprietary API (unless you push the
extensions through Java Community Process), but perhaps we can reduce
the percent of code that uses proprietary extensions.
In the long run, I think that standardizing our APIs is the best thing
for users, who will want standard APIs. But I think we should first come
up with a clean API to be standardized, one that is consistent across
language bindings.
Jonathan
