Re: [paho-dev] [iot-wg] Future Requirements and Releases of Paho
Thank you for starting this discussion. I think the timing is good.
Some suggestions/questions about future Paho requirements:
- I am assuming the MQTT specification will evolve over the next couple of
years. Would it make sense to start an incubator to try out some new ideas
for the spec? Developers could contribute code that implements these ideas
and this would help the MQTT TC in the evolution of the spec.
- Is MQTT-SN implemented in Paho? If not is this a potential future
- I'd like to see a focus on creating tools to test/debug/deploy MQTT apps.
Tools like MQTTLens I think will be critical to the adoption of MQTT. Could
Paho be the home to these types of tools.
For the MARS release train, I think Paho would be a natural fit. Having
stable, mature code that is updated on a regular basis is what our community
will need for long term use. I also hope that we have other IoT project
participate in Mars, so we can start thinking about an IoT package. This
certainly should be a topic for future IoT WG meetings.
I hope this helps.
From: iot-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:iot-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Ian Craggs
Sent: August-28-14 5:57 AM
To: IoT Working Group mailing list; General development discussions for paho
Subject: [iot-wg] Future Requirements and Releases of Paho
I'm wondering what the future of Paho should look like. From two points of
view: functionality and participation in the wider Eclipse community.
The reason is that barring a few relatively minor enhancements (automatic
reconnect, publishing when not connected, persistence), I don't see that the
Python) need a lot of new work, and could stabilize within the near future.
There may be new components - client libraries in different languages, or a
different style of library for a different purpose (like the embedded C/C++
APIs I'm working on at the moment).
So the first question: are there Paho features, additional to the current
libraries, or new components, that would be useful to the Eclipse IoT
The second question is about participation in Mars and future simultaneous
releases. If the Paho components were stable but still useful, how would
Paho participate in a simultaneous release?
icraggs@xxxxxxxxxx IBM United Kingdom
Committer on Paho, Mosquitto
iot-wg mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/iot-wg