----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gordon Sim" <g...@redhat.com> > To: users@qpid.apache.org > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 11:47:38 AM > Subject: Re: [c++]: Progressing AMQP 1.0 support for 0.22 release > > On 03/21/2013 01:19 PM, Ken Giusti wrote: > > Hmmmm... seems like there's not a strong opinion either way. > > > > On reflection, I think I'm actually fine with your original > > proposal > > (separate tool - very generic management tool). As a developer, > > this > > tool would really come in handy - it allows me to manage newly > > developed objects without the need to create a dedicated tool. > > Very > > useful. > > That is indeed the rationale behind the tool. It always felt wrong to > me > that you need to add explicit code just to recognise another class of > object in qpid-config. (I also dislike the fact that it defines its > own > names for options). > > > I think my overall unease is with the rather large number of > > configuration tools that we support. I'm really not crazy about how > > we tend to create a new feature-specific configuration tool every > > time we add a new feature to the broker. I'd rather see a single > > "top level" broker configuration command that supports all the > > configuration aspects of the broker. Openssl and NSS (certutil) > > take > > this approach. I think it would tend towards unifying the > > configuration experience (e.g. naming of common options would be > > consistent, need for familiarity with only one command, etc). > > > > I'm a bit biased. Guess I've found myself fixing the same defect > > across multiple configuration tools a little too often (*cough*, > > SSL > > configuration *cough*). And I still keep having to remind myself > > which option flag is used to specific a non-default broker address > > (? > > is it "-a", or "-b"?). > > I sympathise entirely. For me its less the number of tools per se and > more that there is no clear, comprehensive, thought out strategy > around > them. > > I don't want to make the situation worse. What I propose for 0.22 is > to > add this new script into cpp/src/tests and install it in > libexec/qpid/tests along side other useful scripts and tools such as > qpid-send and qpid-cpp-benchmark. I'll also make it clear in the > usage > text that the tool is experimental at this stage. That way its > available > for those who want it, particularly those exploring 1.0 based > networks, > but its status is clear. > > Does that seem reasonable for now? We can then get some more time and > feedback on which to base more long term decisions.
+1 > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org > > -- -K --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org
