|Re: [paho-dev] Paho repository structure|
FWIW, I personally agree that mosquitto is an established name, and it would be unfortunate to lose it. (This is just my personal opinion, not an official position of the Executive Director :-).) If we were so inclined, there could be a number of ways to accomplish this, even given that the current scope of Paho states that it will cover both client and server. The simplest way would be to simply agree that the server-side "stuff" goes into a nested project within Paho called "mosquitto". There are a couple of alternative such a project could have as its scope statement: it could contain only the C implementation (e.g. current mosquitto), or it could contain all server implementations and future contributions written in different languages (e.g. Java) would use the mosquitto name as well. I'm not prescribing any particular solution. I am just pointing out that there are ways to make many alternatives work if the community once the community decides what they want. @Roger, writing a project proposal should be a relatively lightweight task. If you're spending more than a couple of hours on it, there is a strong possibility that you're doing it wrong :) Wayne Beaton (cc'd above) is always available to help. > -----Original Message----- > I think that mosquitto has an established name now and it would be a shame > to lose that by merging with Paho. I downloaded the Eclipse project proposal > template and started filling it in, but decided that writing tests and > documentation was more interesting. I would like it to happen - writing the > project proposal is really the key point that is delaying things.
Back to the top