On 10/12/2013 11:40 AM, Fraser Adams wrote:
a primary concern and motivation has to be standardisation, particularly Open Standards and they must be seen to be platform neutral - so fundamentally AMQP first and Qpid second. To me that's a reasonable position too because, as has been expressed elsewhere, one of the compelling reasons of "why AMQP" is because it's an Open Standard and *should be* interoperable.
I don't disagree with any of that. Compliance with the current specification and a commitment to demonstrable interoperability around that is, and must be, fundamental to Qpid.
I do also very much want to see interoperability extend to areas not directly covered by this specification.
What I am uncomfortable with is the view that any initiative, wherever and however it was begun, has from the start some unassailable dominion over the area it stakes out for itself.
Sadly that wasn't really achieved for 0.10, but it certainly seems to be the case for 1.0 which I feel we ought to embrace with a passion.
The history of the 0-10 specification is actually interesting to consider here. Though it was the de-jure standard, having passed by unanimous vote through the old working group process, it was clear from the start that there was no real consensus behind it (even from some of those voting, not to mention anyone not represented in the process). Though supported by all Qpid components, it was implemented by nothing else. That is a pattern I don't want to see repeated.
While achieving real consensus is hard, slow and often frustrating, 'official' standards that aren't widely supported are of limited value.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org
