| Re: [hono-dev] Hono JMS adapter |
|
Thanks Dejan for pointing out the main JMS limitations which Hono development is facing (with the Dominik work).
Kai, I know that "Hono's API IS based on AMQP 1.0. Nobody question's this AFAIK." but considering the difference between JMS and AMQP, an API vs a protocol, building an AMQP based API with limitations of another API (JMS) means limiting the underlying protocol features and related potential. I'm just saying to think only in the AMQP way for building the API. If starting using a client, for example JMS client, something can't be implemented in the right AMQP way, an adapter (like Dejan suggested) could be good (like for HTTP, MQTT, ...) or in some other cases, as you said, it could be a bug to fix in the client itself. I completely agree on Vert.x Proton as the Java reference client but at same time, as I already said during the meeting, the developers experience is one of the points for the success of a new platform. As Dejan mentioned, I think that an Hono client library (like a wrapper around the Vert.x Proton) could be a great idea. It's valid for all other programming languages (i.e. using AMQP .Net Lite for .Net oriented clients, RHEA for _javascript_ oriented clients and so on). This is the story for example from Microsoft and Amazon for their IoT platforms (but it's the way a lot of companies think) which offers client SDK as wrapper around the underlying protocol and API (AMQP for MS, MQTT for Amazon). Of course you have the freedom to choose to interact at low level directly with the protocol so against the API definition. Paolo Paolo Patierno Senior Software Engineer (IoT) @ Red Hat Microsoft MVP on Windows Embedded & IoT Microsoft Azure Advisor From: dejanb@xxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:33:23 +0200 To: hono-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [hono-dev] Hono JMS adapter Hi Kai, I was referring to the things we were already discussed, like not being able to use different link and message addresses for producers and hyphens for ids and now correlations. It’s getting into the design decision more and more. I see your point on the importance of the JMS on the data services side, but I’m not quite convinced that long term JMS should be something we should aim for (I’m not a big fan of Spring JMS to be honest for example). Vert.x Proton is a decent client and we can work to make it stable and feature complete (SASL support, etc.). In my opinion (and I think I raised this before) the ideal case for Java world would be to provide a client library with Hono specific API that would give developers better experience. On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Hudalla Kai (INST/ESY1) <Kai.Hudalla@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: On Do, 2016-06-23 at 13:02 +0000, Paolo Patierno wrote: _______________________________________________ hono-dev mailing list hono-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/hono-dev |