You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@activemq.apache.org by "Heiser, Derek" <DH...@quad.com> on 2019/04/17 15:10:57 UTC
AMQNET-565: .net standard port
Hello all,
I wanted to try my hand at this feature request: https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/AMQNET/issues/AMQNET-565?filter=allopenissues to port ActiveMQ to .Net Standard. I’ve started working on a fork here: https://github.com/killnine/activemq-nms-api/tree/refactor but wanted some feedback from contributors before I sink too much time in.
The current build (1.7.2) supports .net 2.0, 3.5, and 4.0.
Net standard 2.0, by default, supports back to 4.6.1. I’ve looked into supporting multiple target frameworks (for instance, .net standard 1.2 supports 4.5.1) but there are some pretty gnarly conflicts (ex: System.Transactions, NUnit 3, serialization attributes) between even .net standard 1.2 and the latest .net standard.
My recommendation would be to treat 1.7.2 as the legacy package and make this change a 1.8.0 build as a fresh start to support 4.6.1 and above with netstandard 2.0. I thing we could update the README to explain the support for earlier frameworks. I totally understand the need to support older platforms, but I think keeping 1.7.2 around and moving forward ensures we aren’t hamstrung by the very clear direction from Microsoft that Netstandard is the way forward.
There’s other issues I’d like to address with the solution organization but figured this was the biggest point of discussion right now…
I’m on the Slack channel if you want to discuss off the record 😉
Thanks!
Derek Heiser
Follow Us: Facebook<http://www.qg.com/social1> | Twitter<http://www.qg.com/social2> | LinkedIn<http://www.qg.com/social3> | YouTube<http://www.qg.com/social4>
RE: AMQNET-565: .net standard port
Posted by "Heiser, Derek" <DH...@quad.com>.
Yeah, I thought about that and am not opposed to it. But typically I think of actual API changes in major version changes and, while the supported frameworks changed, the underlying api surface did not. I do think moving to 2.x does sort of signal to users that 'breaking stuff may have occurred'.
I'm up for whatever, though.
~Derek
-----Original Message-----
From: Timothy Bish <ta...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 12:02 PM
To: dev@activemq.apache.org
Subject: Re: AMQNET-565: .net standard port
On 4/17/19 11:10 AM, Heiser, Derek wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I wanted to try my hand at this feature request: https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/AMQNET/issues/AMQNET-565?filter=allopenissues to port ActiveMQ to .Net Standard. I’ve started working on a fork here: https://github.com/killnine/activemq-nms-api/tree/refactor but wanted some feedback from contributors before I sink too much time in.
>
> The current build (1.7.2) supports .net 2.0, 3.5, and 4.0.
>
> Net standard 2.0, by default, supports back to 4.6.1. I’ve looked into supporting multiple target frameworks (for instance, .net standard 1.2 supports 4.5.1) but there are some pretty gnarly conflicts (ex: System.Transactions, NUnit 3, serialization attributes) between even .net standard 1.2 and the latest .net standard.
>
> My recommendation would be to treat 1.7.2 as the legacy package and make this change a 1.8.0 build as a fresh start to support 4.6.1 and above with netstandard 2.0. I thing we could update the README to explain the support for earlier frameworks. I totally understand the need to support older platforms, but I think keeping 1.7.2 around and moving forward ensures we aren’t hamstrung by the very clear direction from Microsoft that Netstandard is the way forward.
My advice would be to move to v2.0 for the API and any new client releases of NMS.ActiveMQ (or other already released NMS clients) as that makes it more clear that fundamental changes in supported .NET SDKs are present as well as leaving room for breaking API changes etc.
> There’s other issues I’d like to address with the solution
> organization but figured this was the biggest point of discussion
> right now…
>
> I’m on the Slack channel if you want to discuss off the record 😉
>
> Thanks!
>
> Derek Heiser
> Follow Us: Facebook<http://www.qg.com/social1> |
> Twitter<http://www.qg.com/social2> |
> LinkedIn<http://www.qg.com/social3> |
> YouTube<http://www.qg.com/social4>
--
Tim Bish
Re: AMQNET-565: .net standard port
Posted by Timothy Bish <ta...@gmail.com>.
On 4/17/19 11:10 AM, Heiser, Derek wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I wanted to try my hand at this feature request: https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/AMQNET/issues/AMQNET-565?filter=allopenissues to port ActiveMQ to .Net Standard. I’ve started working on a fork here: https://github.com/killnine/activemq-nms-api/tree/refactor but wanted some feedback from contributors before I sink too much time in.
>
> The current build (1.7.2) supports .net 2.0, 3.5, and 4.0.
>
> Net standard 2.0, by default, supports back to 4.6.1. I’ve looked into supporting multiple target frameworks (for instance, .net standard 1.2 supports 4.5.1) but there are some pretty gnarly conflicts (ex: System.Transactions, NUnit 3, serialization attributes) between even .net standard 1.2 and the latest .net standard.
>
> My recommendation would be to treat 1.7.2 as the legacy package and make this change a 1.8.0 build as a fresh start to support 4.6.1 and above with netstandard 2.0. I thing we could update the README to explain the support for earlier frameworks. I totally understand the need to support older platforms, but I think keeping 1.7.2 around and moving forward ensures we aren’t hamstrung by the very clear direction from Microsoft that Netstandard is the way forward.
My advice would be to move to v2.0 for the API and any new client
releases of NMS.ActiveMQ (or other already released NMS clients) as that
makes it more clear that fundamental changes in supported .NET SDKs are
present as well as leaving room for breaking API changes etc.
> There’s other issues I’d like to address with the solution organization but figured this was the biggest point of discussion right now…
>
> I’m on the Slack channel if you want to discuss off the record 😉
>
> Thanks!
>
> Derek Heiser
> Follow Us: Facebook<http://www.qg.com/social1> | Twitter<http://www.qg.com/social2> | LinkedIn<http://www.qg.com/social3> | YouTube<http://www.qg.com/social4>
--
Tim Bish