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

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

James Carman
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

chirino
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
<[hidden email]> 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.
[hidden email] | fusesource.com | redhat.com
skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

clebertsuconic
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 <[hidden email]> 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
> <[hidden email]> 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.
> [hidden email] | fusesource.com | redhat.com
> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino



--
Clebert Suconic
http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@...
http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Jim Gomes
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 <[hidden email]>
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 <[hidden email]>
> 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
> > <[hidden email]> 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.
> > [hidden email] | fusesource.com | redhat.com
> > skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@...
> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

clebertsuconic
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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]>
> 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 <[hidden email]>
>> 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
>> > <[hidden email]> 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.
>> > [hidden email] | fusesource.com | redhat.com
>> > skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Clebert Suconic
>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@...
>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>>



--
Clebert Suconic
http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@...
http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Jim Gomes
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" <[hidden email]>
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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]
> >
> > 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 <[hidden email]
> >
> >> 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
> >> > <[hidden email]> 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.
> >> > [hidden email] | fusesource.com | redhat.com
> >> > skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Clebert Suconic
> >> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@...
> >> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
> >>
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@...
> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

clebertsuconic
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.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Jim Gomes
Sounds good. Thanks for the update, Clebert!

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015, 1:36 PM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>
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.
>