You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@qpid.apache.org by Aidan Skinner <ai...@apache.org> on 2009/02/02 11:33:05 UTC
Re: IKVMing the Java client for .Net
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 6:11 AM, David Ingham
<Da...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> Carl's right, we have been investigating the idea of layering a WCF channel implementation on top of the C++ client library. That is, the managed code channel implementation would pinvoke down to the native C++ code. This is the approach that we used for the MSMQ channel that ships in the .NET framework today and it works pretty well. We're drawn to this approach primarily because of the maturity of the C++ code base. The pure .NET approach clearly has merit too; one of the key advantages being that it offers the potential to factor the code in a way that's more in line with WCF best practice, i.e., as a set of layered channels rather than as a monolithic block.
Doing it on top of the C++ client has two current disadvantages over
the Java client that I can see:
not 100% managed code
only supports 0-10
Not having all managed code reduces portability (since you're now
limited to the platforms that the C++ client supports) and limits the
security profiles that the client will run under.
Only supporting 0-10 means it won't talk to the current Java broker or
any of the other AMQP implementations such as OpenAMQ or RabbitMQ.
Related to this, it seems likely that the Java client will support
AMQP 1-0 before the C++ client does, if only because the Java client
already supports multiple protocols.
On an unrelated note, what do you mean by the "the maturity of the C++
code base"? What about that client made it a better choice from your
PoV than the Java client?
- Aidan
--
Apache Qpid - World Domination through Advanced Message Queueing
http://qpid.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: IKVMing the Java client for .Net
Posted by Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>.
>
>
> On the Java broker side, we currently have no-one (unless I missed it)
> declaring that they're working on 0-10 for M5. Is someone planning to
> do this, firmly ? I think this has bearing on my (and other Java-ers)
> views here of the short-term/medium-term requirements.
Marnie,
From the thread earlier, I believe it was discussed to keep the Java
broker stable for M5 and do larger changes for M6. I think that
discussing has headed off work on M5 for 0-10. If this has changed, I
am sure enough people will pile in to get it to 0-10 for M5.
So, to open that topic again -- those working on Java, want to have that
amount of change for M5?
Carl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: IKVMing the Java client for .Net
Posted by Marnie McCormack <ma...@googlemail.com>.
I think a key point in our decision making here, one we have not always
given enough importance to, is the needs of our existing users. A few of
them bend my ear, so here goes ....
Qpid has been going for quite a while now, and we have many existing users
who have deployed a Java Broker and are using the .Net/Java/C++ (old)
clients to talk to it. We need to avoid creating situations where these
users are forced to upgrade their broker to use our clients going forward.
Interoperability is really important, and will remain so for the next 12
months. Not all implementors of AMQP will be at the same version as quickly
as others. Backwards compability remains a significant advantage for our
users. and one we should strive to keep.
On the Java broker side, we currently have no-one (unless I missed it)
declaring that they're working on 0-10 for M5. Is someone planning to do
this, firmly ? I think this has bearing on my (and other Java-ers) views
here of the short-term/medium-term requirements.
Marnie
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 4:37 PM, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Aidan Skinner wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Only supporting 0-10 means it won't talk to the current Java broker or
>>>> any of the other AMQP implementations such as OpenAMQ or RabbitMQ.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Does that really matter, we already have an 0-8 client for .NET and
>>> others
>>> exist. We need to look
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I think having a client which can interoperate with 3 of the 4 AMQP
>> brokers I know of is quite important. The existing 0-8 .Net client is
>> somewhat suboptimal and doesn't support any standard API.
>>
>
> I believe that should drive our technology selection. That is something
> that will change with the
> political landscape. What does not change is that we will need to maintain
> the client for many years. I
> think we should work out the optimal solution for .NET (Windows) as the top
> criteria for technology
> selection.
>
> Carl.
>
Re: mailing lists are not showing on the mod_mbox site listing
Posted by Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>.
Infra has fixed it for us.
Carl.
Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> The Qpid mailing lists have disappeared from the mod_mbox site listing at
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/
>
> For a while both the incubator lists and the new top level lists were
> present on the page, but now neither set are present, although the current
> archives are still working ok if you follow the direct links from the qpid
> pages.
>
>
> Robbie
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: mailing lists are not showing on the mod_mbox site listing
Posted by Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com>.
Should be fixed now.
----- Original Message ----
> From: Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>
> To: dev@qpid.apache.org; Apache Infrastructure <in...@apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, February 2, 2009 3:44:40 PM
> Subject: mailing lists are not showing on the mod_mbox site listing
>
>
> Infra,
>
> Is some one able to take a look at this, do we need to file a ticket?
>
> Carl.
>
>
> Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> > The Qpid mailing lists have disappeared from the mod_mbox site listing at
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/
> >
> > For a while both the incubator lists and the new top level lists were
> > present on the page, but now neither set are present, although the current
> > archives are still working ok if you follow the direct links from the qpid
> > pages.
> >
> >
> > Robbie
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> > Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> > Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
> >
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: mailing lists are not showing on the mod_mbox site listing
Posted by Yegor Kozlov <ye...@apache.org>.
Hi Infra,
POI lists are not showing on mod_mbox. Would you please check what's the matter.
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/poi-user/
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/poi-dev/
Strange, but for some projects mod_mbox works just fine, for example, I can see
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-java-dev/
Thanks,
Yegor
>
> Infra,
>
> Is some one able to take a look at this, do we need to file a ticket?
>
> Carl.
>
>
> Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>> The Qpid mailing lists have disappeared from the mod_mbox site listing at
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/
>>
>> For a while both the incubator lists and the new top level lists were
>> present on the page, but now neither set are present, although the
>> current
>> archives are still working ok if you follow the direct links from the
>> qpid
>> pages.
>>
>>
>> Robbie
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
>> Project: http://qpid.apache.org
>> Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
mailing lists are not showing on the mod_mbox site listing
Posted by Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>.
Infra,
Is some one able to take a look at this, do we need to file a ticket?
Carl.
Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> The Qpid mailing lists have disappeared from the mod_mbox site listing at
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/
>
> For a while both the incubator lists and the new top level lists were
> present on the page, but now neither set are present, although the current
> archives are still working ok if you follow the direct links from the qpid
> pages.
>
>
> Robbie
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
mailing lists are not showing on the mod_mbox site listing
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ge...@dcs.gla.ac.uk>.
The Qpid mailing lists have disappeared from the mod_mbox site listing at
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/
For a while both the incubator lists and the new top level lists were
present on the page, but now neither set are present, although the current
archives are still working ok if you follow the direct links from the qpid
pages.
Robbie
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: IKVMing the Java client for .Net
Posted by Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>.
Carl Trieloff wrote:
> Aidan Skinner wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> Only supporting 0-10 means it won't talk to the current Java broker or
>>>> any of the other AMQP implementations such as OpenAMQ or RabbitMQ.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Does that really matter, we already have an 0-8 client for .NET and
>>> others
>>> exist. We need to look
>>>
>>
>> I think having a client which can interoperate with 3 of the 4 AMQP
>> brokers I know of is quite important. The existing 0-8 .Net client is
>> somewhat suboptimal and doesn't support any standard API.
>
Correction...
> I believe that should -- not -- drive our technology selection. That
> is something that will change with the
> political landscape. What does not change is that we will need to
> maintain the client for many years. I
> think we should work out the optimal solution for .NET (Windows) as
> the top criteria for technology
> selection.
>
> Carl.
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: IKVMing the Java client for .Net
Posted by Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>.
Aidan Skinner wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
>>> Only supporting 0-10 means it won't talk to the current Java broker or
>>> any of the other AMQP implementations such as OpenAMQ or RabbitMQ.
>>>
>>>
>> Does that really matter, we already have an 0-8 client for .NET and others
>> exist. We need to look
>>
>
> I think having a client which can interoperate with 3 of the 4 AMQP
> brokers I know of is quite important. The existing 0-8 .Net client is
> somewhat suboptimal and doesn't support any standard API.
I believe that should drive our technology selection. That is something
that will change with the
political landscape. What does not change is that we will need to
maintain the client for many years. I
think we should work out the optimal solution for .NET (Windows) as the
top criteria for technology
selection.
Carl.
Re: IKVMing the Java client for .Net
Posted by Aidan Skinner <ai...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Only supporting 0-10 means it won't talk to the current Java broker or
>> any of the other AMQP implementations such as OpenAMQ or RabbitMQ.
>>
>
> Does that really matter, we already have an 0-8 client for .NET and others
> exist. We need to look
I think having a client which can interoperate with 3 of the 4 AMQP
brokers I know of is quite important. The existing 0-8 .Net client is
somewhat suboptimal and doesn't support any standard API.
- Aidan
--
Apache Qpid - World Domination through Advanced Message Queueing
http://qpid.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: IKVMing the Java client for .Net
Posted by Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>.
> Only supporting 0-10 means it won't talk to the current Java broker or
> any of the other AMQP implementations such as OpenAMQ or RabbitMQ.
>
Does that really matter, we already have an 0-8 client for .NET and
others exist. We need to look
forward. I would say the target is Windows where dll's will work fine &
Mono for which I have no
idea the limitations.
Carl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org