> > >
> > >Sorry, I may have not made my question clear.
> > >Publisher doesn't have to be aware of consumer, but it must know the
> > >binding key.
> > >Now I reread the below statement I think I got your idea is:
> > >When subscriber subscribes an event, the framework creates the queue
> > >and n
> On 31/01/13 12:34 AM, "Frank Zhang" wrote:
> >
> >Sorry, I may have not made my question clear.
> >Publisher doesn't have to be aware of consumer, but it must know the
> >binding key.
> >Now I reread the below statement I think I got your idea is:
> >When subscriber subscribes an event, the fram
On 31/01/13 12:34 AM, "Frank Zhang" wrote:
>
>Sorry, I may have not made my question clear.
>Publisher doesn't have to be aware of consumer, but it must know the
>binding key.
>Now I reread the below statement I think I got your idea is:
>When subscriber subscribes an event, the framework creates
>
>
> >
> >Ok. this makes more sense as I think there would not be too many
> >subscribers.
> >So you would notify publisher that a new queue has been created?
> >Otherwise how does publisher push the events out?
>
> Generally idea of pub-sub model is that publisher/subscriber need not be
> awa
Chip,
Thanks for taking care of legal docs. I will include the legal
documentation when I merge.
On 30/01/13 8:10 PM, "Chip Childers" wrote:
>On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Chip Childers
> wrote:
>> 3) One of us has to take care of the legal docs. I'll actually take
>> care of it directly i
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Chip Childers
wrote:
> 3) One of us has to take care of the legal docs. I'll actually take
> care of it directly in master today.
Murali,
I updated some legal doc stuff in master, and then cherry-picked them
over to the events-framework branch. I then committed
>
>Ok. this makes more sense as I think there would not be too many
>subscribers.
>So you would notify publisher that a new queue has been created? Otherwise
>how does publisher push the events out?
Generally idea of pub-sub model is that publisher/subscriber need not be
aware the existence of ot
>
> >Sorry I may be late on this topic
> >
> >> Routing is designed to have the format.
> >>
> >> Event-source.Event-Category.Event-Type.Resource.ResourceUUID. For
> e.g.
> >> A message is published with a routing key:
> >> management-server:ActionEvent:SNAPSHOT-
> CREATE:Snapshot:0a7ea29e-
> >> 6
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Murali Reddy wrote:
>
>>Great to see this being close to coming into master! A couple of
>>questions:
>>
>>1 - I don't seem to be able to find any new unit tests that cover the
>>feature. Are there any that I'm missing?
>
> I am working on unit tests. I will upda
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 1:41 AM, Murali Reddy wrote:
>
>>Murali,
>>
>>The use of Rabbit is still a question for me. It seems like you went
>>with Rabbit, but the answer you gave as to "why" [1] didn't really
>>answer the question or respond to the issue I raised about the
>>practicalities of AMQP
>Great to see this being close to coming into master! A couple of
>questions:
>
>1 - I don't seem to be able to find any new unit tests that cover the
>feature. Are there any that I'm missing?
I am working on unit tests. I will update the thread once I have unit
tests pushed to feature branch
>Murali,
>
>The use of Rabbit is still a question for me. It seems like you went
>with Rabbit, but the answer you gave as to "why" [1] didn't really
>answer the question or respond to the issue I raised about the
>practicalities of AMQP differences between versions and brokers [2].
>Can you addres
On 29/01/13 12:37 AM, "Frank Zhang" wrote:
>Sorry I may be late on this topic
>
>> Routing is designed to have the format.
>>
>> Event-source.Event-Category.Event-Type.Resource.ResourceUUID. For e.g.
>> A message is published with a routing key:
>> management-server:ActionEvent:SNAPSHOT-CREATE:S
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Chris Sears wrote:
> On #3, since RabbitMQ's java client library is licensed under MPL 1.1,
> I assume it would fall under the "Category B" list of licenses.
>
> From http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b :
> "By including only the object/binary form
Sorry I may be late on this topic
> Routing is designed to have the format.
>
> Event-source.Event-Category.Event-Type.Resource.ResourceUUID. For e.g.
> A message is published with a routing key:
> management-server:ActionEvent:SNAPSHOT-CREATE:Snapshot:0a7ea29e-
> 691b-11e2-b
> afa-2c3ba27d8c47.
On #3, since RabbitMQ's java client library is licensed under MPL 1.1,
I assume it would fall under the "Category B" list of licenses.
>From http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b :
"By including only the object/binary form, there is less exposed
surface area of the third-party work
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Murali Reddy wrote:
> I would like to request merge of events framework [4] branch changes in to
> master to branch.
>
> I have proposed a while ago [1], about the need for a framework to
> Publish-Subscribe CloudStack to events. Initially I was planning to use
>
I would like to request merge of events framework [4] branch changes in to
master to branch.
I have proposed a while ago [1], about the need for a framework to
Publish-Subscribe CloudStack to events. Initially I was planning to use
simple in-memory based publish-subscribe mechanism using google ev
18 matches
Mail list logo
