It was pointed out to me that sloppy wording on my part may have led to
an impression other than the one intended. At the risk of digging a
bigger hole, I'd like to try to correct that.
On 10/11/2013 12:36 PM, Gordon Sim wrote:
As I said before, my interest is not in reforming OASIS. My
On the topic of names and perhaps following the same track as particles
with Proton, can I suggest Boson in honour of the forthcoming Nobel
award to Professor Peter Higgs. It kind of seems appropriate on a couple
of levels?
Frase
On 11/10/13 13:47, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 10/11/2013 01:32 PM,
I'd like to wade in slightly here if I may as I've been following this
thread with great interest.
I guess that I might be in a vaguely interesting position as although my
employers are interested in and make use of AMQP/Qpid my contributions
to this group have been entirely at a personal
This is an excellent post which I think highlights the need for us to
properly define the scopes of our current components, their roadmaps, and
the vision we have for Qpid and AMQP 1.0.
I know some people have already replied in thread, but would it seem like a
good idea if we used these
On 10/10/2013 09:38 AM, Rob Godfrey wrote:
My main concern is that I believe that Qpid should be primarily directed at
implementing AMQP standards, and building resuable toolkits and components
that fit into any AMQP network. I'd be very concerned if we were inventing
alternative management
On 10 October 2013 12:46, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/10/2013 10:58 AM, Rob Godfrey wrote:
I think the point of Qpid (vs. any other messaging
implementation at Apache or elsewhere) is to implement the AMQP
specification.
I have no disagreement when the AMQP specification is
On 10/10/2013 11:20 AM, Rob Godfrey wrote:
On 10 October 2013 15:35, Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/10/2013 04:38 AM, Rob Godfrey wrote:
My main concern is that I believe that Qpid should be primarily directed
at implementing AMQP standards, and building resuable toolkits and
Hi guys,
-Original Message-
From: Rob Godfrey [mailto:rob.j.godf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 11:21 AM
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: Qpid Dispatch Router component
On 10 October 2013 15:35, Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/10/2013 04:38 AM
Hey all,
The thread below on the dev list has prompted me to ask something that
I've tentatively mentioned before, but am still a bit embarrassed to
raise 'cause it probably makes me seem a bit stupid :-( here goes
anyway.
So I've kind of held off going down the AMQP 1.0 path partly due
Frase,
This is an excellent post, and I believe quite relevant. I'll try to
address your questions at an abstract level rather than point-by-point.
Your confusion is not unique, but quite justified.
AMQP 1.0 is simply a wire-level protocol specification for symmetric
point-to-point data
Great post! +1.
The community needs to do more to explain, document, and promote.
William
- Original Message -
Hey all,
The thread below on the dev list has prompted me to ask something that
I've tentatively mentioned before, but am still a bit embarrassed to
raise 'cause it
Ted,
Can someone add your text to the community web pages and link parts to
appropriate pages?
i.e. can we use Frase's and your posts to augment the community pages rather
than just leaving here in list archives?
William
- Original Message -
Frase,
This is an excellent post,
Now, to answer your actual questions... See inline below.
On 10/09/2013 02:22 PM, Fraser Adams wrote:
Hey all,
The thread below on the dev list has prompted me to ask something that
I've tentatively mentioned before, but am still a bit embarrassed to
raise 'cause it probably makes me seem a
13 matches
Mail list logo
