-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 +1000 :)
- -- dims Daniel Kulp wrote: | | | Pretty much any stack is going to have those same features readily | available. If Sandesha defined interfaces it needed, then any | implementation could provide implementations for those interfaces that calls | back into that implementations versions. It shouldn't be a big deal. | | Basically, if there are thoughts to re-architect things based on the Mercury | code, it's something that would be good to consider from a technical | viewpoint, but, more importantly, from a community view point as well. | | Remember, at Apache, it's community over code. :-) | | Dan | | | | Chamikara Jayalath wrote: |> We actually considered this idea in the early phases of Sandesha2. After |> some discussions we thought of going for a Axis2 based one so that we can |> use all the features that are readily available with Axis2. These included |> the context hierarchy, pause/resume functionality, Messages Receivers, |> AXIOM |> etc. |> |> Chamikara |> |> |> On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: |> |>> |>> Just FYI: I'm also quite interested in the idea of a "generic" RM engine |>> that could be plugged in to various stacks/providers. Things like WSS4J |>> and Neethi have been a big help to CXF (and probably others) specifically |>> because they were "generic" enough to be used outside of Axis. In the |>> case of WSS4J, it has actually helped the WSS4J community as developers |>> working on CXF stuff have started contributing to WSS4J as well. Fred |>> Dushin is now a committer on WSS4J specifically due to work integrating |>> it |>> with CXF. Sandesha could potentially benefit similarly if it can become |>> generic enough to not be considered "just a RM plugin to Axis 2". |>> Basically, this could be an opportunity to expand the Sandesha community, |>> and that's a good thing. |>> |>> Dan |>> |>> |>> |>> |>> pzfreo wrote: |>>> David |>>> |>>> I want to make it clear that I'm *strongly* hoping that there will be |>>> greater involvement than just one person. |>>> |>>> I also *really* like the idea of building an RM implementation that |>>> has a core model that is not dependent around a specific stack (Axis2, |>>> CXF). I have always believed that there is a space for a really stable |>>> and performant WSRM messaging engine and the Sandesha model - where |>>> the stack is in control and the messaging engine is "just" a set of |>>> handlers just doesn't feel to me like it can compete with a pure |>>> messaging option like ActiveMQ or QPid. So in many ways, starting from |>>> WSRM and treating the problem as "how to build a messaging engine that |>>> also happens to be able to fit into Axis2" would be very interesting |>>> to me. |>>> |>>> I am actually not against having an incubator proposal. The only |>>> challenge with the Incubator is that: |>>> 1) the incubator is fundamentally designed to bootstrap new |>>> communities. If there is an existing community already then it doesn't |>>> necessarily work. I would rather have this discussion on sandesha-dev |>>> than have to somehow encourage everyone from sandesha-dev to start |>>> paying attention to a new list. |>>> 2) The incubator is also about how to get non-Apache members involved. |>>> So far everyone interested in this is already a committer in Apache. |>>> So in fact, labs.apache.org is more appropriate. |>>> 3) The incubator is a hassle. Its a hassle for good reasons and I |>>> strongly support it. But if you don't need that hassle, then you |>>> shouldn't take it! |>>> |>>> How would a design that works across both CXF and Axis2 work? Its an |>>> intriguing idea. |>>> |>>> Paul |>>> |>>> |>>> |>>> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:02 PM, David Illsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |>>> wrote: |>>>> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 1:24 PM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |>> wrote: |>>>>> Glen. I didn't think there was any consensus from the previous |>>>>> discussion (does the word dissensus exist?) :) |>>>>> |>>>>> I am actually pretty happy to do either, I think each approach has +s |>>>>> and -s. |>>>>> |>>>>> On the side of starting from the Mercury codebase, Amila has got it |>> to |>>>>> a point where it satisfies the 1.0 spec, including Replay. |>>>>> On the other hand, Mercury doesn't yet implement 1.1 or |>>>>> MakeConnection, and also it doesn't support transactions yet, so |>> there |>>>>> are some fairly large aspects still to be coded. And starting afresh |>>>>> might well get more involvement from the wider community which I |>> think |>>>>> has been the main pushback on this proposal so far. |>>>> Clearly new code developed here will have far fewer legal issues (e.g. |>>>> the submitted Mercury has a hard LGPL dependency which would need |>>>> ironed out), and would hopefully have a cleaner state machine model - |>>>> the Mercury one seems to have compromised for reasons which are pretty |>>>> opaque. |>>>> |>>>>> I guess one open question is - who is willing to put in the effort to |>>>>> work on this?! If it's just Amila, then starting afresh won't be much |>>>>> benefit, because he will be happier to keep working from the code he |>>>>> has already built. |>>>> I'd certainly be interested in being involved in a new codebase, but |>>>> the amount of time I'd have to devote to it would be limited. If it's |>>>> just Amila, then my "Apache Way Sense" tingles to suggest that this |>>>> isn't really going anywhere in Apache, and probably shouldn't. |>>>> |>>>> These 2 questions (legal and community) are some of the reasons why |>>>> the Incubator exists, and sort of points me back in that direction. |>>>> |>>>> David |>>>> |>>>> P.S. In writing this, it occurred to me that trying to write a common |>>>> WS-RM kernel that could be used with CXF and Axis2 might be a good |>>>> target, and that too, might point to the Incubator to help build a |>>>> broader community (not a fully formed thought though) |>>>> |>>>> P.P.S. I really like "dissensus" |>>>> |>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- |>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |>>>> |>>>> |>>> |>>> |>>> -- |>>> Paul Fremantle |>>> Co-Founder and CTO, WSO2 |>>> Apache Synapse PMC Chair |>>> OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair |>>> |>>> blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org |>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] |>>> |>>> "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com |>>> |>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- |>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |>>> |>>> |>>> |>> -- |>> View this message in context: |>> http://www.nabble.com/-DISCUSS--Mercury-Proposal-tp17790601p17828246.html |>> Sent from the Apache Sandesha mailing list archive at Nabble.com. |>> |>> |>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- |>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |>> |>> |> | -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin) iD8DBQFIUtb1gNg6eWEDv1kRAmoUAJ9QWbxzTILbMGDq+fNUPb/WjzWe5gCeNlbr 7p7aadA/Wb8Ux7wGSBeMGrU= =CdJ1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
