I've been using distinct API names as well. I'll be releasing a rough version of what John and I discussed on my GitHub probably later this evening called, jzmq-api, with a basic wrapper around the existing jzmq. Keep on mind that's its very much a work in progress and it's to facilitate discussion amongst the community. It will be released under LGPL.
-Trev Sent from my iPhone On 2013-02-06, at 2:43 PM, John Watson <jkwat...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Personally I'd reuse JZMQ and make the low-level API a part of the new >> > project. Over time you probably want to implement the HL classes directly >> > over libzmq, and you can eventually deprecate the low-level API totally. >> >> Just for the sake of compatibility, I would keep clear of reusing names; >> jzmq has had a lot of use so far, I believe it is better to come up with a >> new name (package) for the new project. That way we will avoid confusion. > > Absolutely agreed. I've been doing that in the jeromq project so far. I > don't want to mess with the existing APIs and would never collide from a > naming perspective (I'm using the jzmq APIs internally in a lot of places, so > I *have* to use different packaging). > > John > > > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
