Re: [paho-dev] Contribution of MQTT Servers (Mosquitto and RSMB)

[Roger Light <roger@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Ian,

Great news - particularly on the MQTT-SN front! I agree that server
code should go here and the client into Paho.

I did volunteer to do a presentation and did mae a start, but didn't
get much further than that I'm afraid. What I've got is a pretty
minimal outline and I'm not sure it would be of much use to you. Feel
free to show me how it should've been done :)

Cheers,

Roger





On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Ian Craggs
<icraggs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Roger,
>
> looking back through my inbox, I forgot you volunteered for this.   Did you
> get started (or finished) with a presentation?
>
> Ian
>
>
> On 14/08/13 15:03, Roger Light wrote:
>>
>> Hi Ian,
>>
>> I agree that option 1) makes the most sense. We might as well start
>> out on the right foot.
>>
>> I'll look into getting the proposal into HTML and a presentation done
>> in the meantime. If there's anything you'd like to contribute to the
>> latter I'd be grateful.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Roger
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Ian Craggs
>> <icraggs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hmm.  I've just realized that I have more process to go through here at
>>> IBM
>>> than I thought to get RSMB code released.  I thought I was near the top
>>> of
>>> the hill, but it's just another ridge :-(  I hope it won't take too long
>>> to
>>> really get to the top.
>>>
>>> The options I think we have:
>>>
>>> 1) wait a while for me to find out just how much longer it will take for
>>> RSMB code to be released, or
>>> 2) change the proposal a little to either a) omit the RSMB initial
>>> contribution or b) make the RSMB initial contribution optional. If option
>>> a)
>>> RSMB code could be contributed at a later date.
>>>
>>> I would prefer 1) because I would like IBM and RSMB to be there at the
>>> start
>>> of the project, and I can use this fact in the internal IBM discussions
>>> about the release of RSMB, but not if it all takes too long.
>>>
>>> Sorry about this.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ian
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08/12/2013 09:28 PM, Roger Light wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> The changes look good to me, I think it's in pretty good shape now.
>>>>
>>>> I agree with what Ian says about code merging and just to add that I
>>>> look forward to seeing the rsmb code and finding the bits that it does
>>>> better than mosquitto.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Roger
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Ian Craggs
>>>> <icraggs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Ian, Mike,
>>>>>
>>>>> to answer the question of how Mosquitto and RSMB code bases will be
>>>>> merged.
>>>>>
>>>>> My view is that this proposal is as much as a "declaration of intent"
>>>>> from
>>>>> IBM, as much as a contribution of code.   It will signal that the
>>>>> future
>>>>> of
>>>>> RSMB is in open source, here in Eclipse.  That signal is for people
>>>>> inside
>>>>> IBM as well as in the open source community.  Whether RSMB code is
>>>>> actually
>>>>> used in a final Mosquitto product is secondary - there will be no
>>>>> forced
>>>>> merging.
>>>>>
>>>>> IBM will have already contributed to the project: the design of MQTT
>>>>> and
>>>>> much of the external behaviour of Mosquitto itself, which was
>>>>> originally
>>>>> derived from RSMB.  The design of RSMB, though it looks simple, was
>>>>> influenced by my years of experience with MQTT servers, and with the
>>>>> collaboration of a number of other IBM folk, like Andy Stanford-Clark,
>>>>> Dave
>>>>> Conway-Jones, Nick O'Leary and Dave Locke.
>>>>>
>>>>> There a few functions that exist in RSMB that do not currently in
>>>>> Mosquitto
>>>>> - some serviceability aids in RSMB were required by IBM to build a
>>>>> supported
>>>>> product for instance.   Both RSMB and the existing Mosquitto projects
>>>>> use
>>>>> conditional compilation to allow smaller, less functional executables
>>>>> to
>>>>> be
>>>>> built as desired.   If there is function which IBM wants, but the
>>>>> Mosquitto
>>>>> project leads do not, it could be applied by patch or conditional
>>>>> compilation by IBM (but would still be open source).  If code from RSMB
>>>>> is
>>>>> useful, having the codebase contributed already makes it easy to pick
>>>>> and
>>>>> choose.
>>>>>
>>>>> Either way, I intend to contribute to the project, whether through code
>>>>> or
>>>>> tests or documentation, or in other ways.  And we already have a
>>>>> codebase
>>>>> which satisfies the draft aims of the project.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ian Craggs
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 08/12/2013 04:56 PM, Mike Milinkovich wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The proposal looks good to me. Has there been a discussion on how the
>>>>>>> RSMB
>>>>>>> and Mosquitto code bases will be merged?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Step one is to get both code bases contributed to a common project
>>>>>> under
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> same license. Before that happens, the code merge conversation is
>>>>>> rather
>>>>>> moot. Especially since RSMB's code is not currently available in open
>>>>>> source
>>>>>> for others to see.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> paho-dev mailing list
>> paho-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/paho-dev
>
>