[DISCUSS] Should ActiveMQ {CodeName} Support Backward Compatibility with HornetQ...

[James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>]

It has come to light that some folks feel that ActiveMQ {CodeName}
should support backward compatibility with HornetQ.  I don't think
this has been discussed specifically within the community yet, so I
thought I'd bring it up.

James

Re: [DISCUSS] Should ActiveMQ {CodeName} Support Backward Compatibility with HornetQ...

[Jim Gomes <jg...@apache.org>]

Sounds good. Thanks for the update, Clebert!

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015, 1:36 PM Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> It's hard to come up with a time.. it only depends on users.....  We
> need to make proper announcements at the hornetq community first and
> talk to users there about that. So far we are in wait mode for the
> first release.
>
> > From what I've seen in other messages, it seems like this support is
> there,
> > or almost there, already. Is that correct?
>
> There are a few places like internal properties where this would cause
> semantic issues, so we left those untouched. (which was the PR sent).
>
> That PR sent will break compatibility but I will follow up with
> something preserving compatibility without offending new clients.
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Should ActiveMQ {CodeName} Support Backward Compatibility with HornetQ...

[Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>]

It's hard to come up with a time.. it only depends on users.....  We
need to make proper announcements at the hornetq community first and
talk to users there about that. So far we are in wait mode for the
first release.

> From what I've seen in other messages, it seems like this support is there,
> or almost there, already. Is that correct?

There are a few places like internal properties where this would cause
semantic issues, so we left those untouched. (which was the PR sent).

That PR sent will break compatibility but I will follow up with
something preserving compatibility without offending new clients.

Re: [DISCUSS] Should ActiveMQ {CodeName} Support Backward Compatibility with HornetQ...

[Jim Gomes <jg...@apache.org>]

Then I would say yes, we should support them through a transition plan. It
might be helpful to lay out a time line of which version this support will
be removed. That gives fair notice to everyone involved.

>From what I've seen in other messages, it seems like this support is there,
or almost there, already. Is that correct?
 On Apr 15, 2015 11:20 AM, "Clebert Suconic" <cl...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I would say it's a short term for older clients being able to connect
> via deprecated.
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Jim Gomes <jg...@apache.org> wrote:
> > There's a difference between should and can. Is this a short term support
> > via deprecated and planned obsolescence, or is it long term first class
> > support? I don't really know much about what the HornetQ support entails.
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 15, 2015, 9:18 AM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I think it doesn't hurt to do it. it's only beneficial.
> >>
> >>
> >> The concern probably started from this Pull Request:
> >> https://github.com/apache/activemq-6/pull/205
> >>
> >> Which we will merge it.. I will just extend the change to coupe with
> >> old clients.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Hiram Chirino <hiram@hiramchirino.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >> > Yep.  I think supporting old HornetQ clients should be a goal too.  If
> >> > it's not too much effort will open our projects to more users which I
> >> > think is a good thing.
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:43 AM, James Carman
> >> > <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
> >> >> It has come to light that some folks feel that ActiveMQ {CodeName}
> >> >> should support backward compatibility with HornetQ.  I don't think
> >> >> this has been discussed specifically within the community yet, so I
> >> >> thought I'd bring it up.
> >> >>
> >> >> James
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Hiram Chirino
> >> > Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.
> >> > hchirino@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com
> >> > skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Clebert Suconic
> >> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
> >> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
> >>
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Should ActiveMQ {CodeName} Support Backward Compatibility with HornetQ...

[Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>]

I would say it's a short term for older clients being able to connect
via deprecated.

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Jim Gomes <jg...@apache.org> wrote:
> There's a difference between should and can. Is this a short term support
> via deprecated and planned obsolescence, or is it long term first class
> support? I don't really know much about what the HornetQ support entails.
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015, 9:18 AM Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I think it doesn't hurt to do it. it's only beneficial.
>>
>>
>> The concern probably started from this Pull Request:
>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-6/pull/205
>>
>> Which we will merge it.. I will just extend the change to coupe with
>> old clients.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Hiram Chirino <hi...@hiramchirino.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Yep.  I think supporting old HornetQ clients should be a goal too.  If
>> > it's not too much effort will open our projects to more users which I
>> > think is a good thing.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:43 AM, James Carman
>> > <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>> >> It has come to light that some folks feel that ActiveMQ {CodeName}
>> >> should support backward compatibility with HornetQ.  I don't think
>> >> this has been discussed specifically within the community yet, so I
>> >> thought I'd bring it up.
>> >>
>> >> James
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Hiram Chirino
>> > Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.
>> > hchirino@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com
>> > skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Clebert Suconic
>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>>



-- 
Clebert Suconic
http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com

Re: [DISCUSS] Should ActiveMQ {CodeName} Support Backward Compatibility with HornetQ...

[Jim Gomes <jg...@apache.org>]

There's a difference between should and can. Is this a short term support
via deprecated and planned obsolescence, or is it long term first class
support? I don't really know much about what the HornetQ support entails.

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015, 9:18 AM Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I think it doesn't hurt to do it. it's only beneficial.
>
>
> The concern probably started from this Pull Request:
> https://github.com/apache/activemq-6/pull/205
>
> Which we will merge it.. I will just extend the change to coupe with
> old clients.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Hiram Chirino <hi...@hiramchirino.com>
> wrote:
> > Yep.  I think supporting old HornetQ clients should be a goal too.  If
> > it's not too much effort will open our projects to more users which I
> > think is a good thing.
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:43 AM, James Carman
> > <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
> >> It has come to light that some folks feel that ActiveMQ {CodeName}
> >> should support backward compatibility with HornetQ.  I don't think
> >> this has been discussed specifically within the community yet, so I
> >> thought I'd bring it up.
> >>
> >> James
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Hiram Chirino
> > Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.
> > hchirino@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com
> > skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Should ActiveMQ {CodeName} Support Backward Compatibility with HornetQ...

[Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>]

I think it doesn't hurt to do it. it's only beneficial.


The concern probably started from this Pull Request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-6/pull/205

Which we will merge it.. I will just extend the change to coupe with
old clients.




On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Hiram Chirino <hi...@hiramchirino.com> wrote:
> Yep.  I think supporting old HornetQ clients should be a goal too.  If
> it's not too much effort will open our projects to more users which I
> think is a good thing.
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:43 AM, James Carman
> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>> It has come to light that some folks feel that ActiveMQ {CodeName}
>> should support backward compatibility with HornetQ.  I don't think
>> this has been discussed specifically within the community yet, so I
>> thought I'd bring it up.
>>
>> James
>
>
>
> --
> Hiram Chirino
> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.
> hchirino@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com
> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino



-- 
Clebert Suconic
http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com

Re: [DISCUSS] Should ActiveMQ {CodeName} Support Backward Compatibility with HornetQ...

[Hiram Chirino <hi...@hiramchirino.com>]

Yep.  I think supporting old HornetQ clients should be a goal too.  If
it's not too much effort will open our projects to more users which I
think is a good thing.

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:43 AM, James Carman
<ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
> It has come to light that some folks feel that ActiveMQ {CodeName}
> should support backward compatibility with HornetQ.  I don't think
> this has been discussed specifically within the community yet, so I
> thought I'd bring it up.
>
> James



-- 
Hiram Chirino
Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.
hchirino@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com
skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino