[standards-jig] Pub/Sub Explanation
theo at theoretic.com
Tue Apr 16 18:23:29 UTC 2002
Dave Smith wrote:
> Wow. There are some fundamental differences in our trains of thought.
> Frankly, what I'm hearing from DJ and piers is the requirement for a
> light-weight notification system -- and maybe that's a truer definition of
> "pub/sub". What I am proposing is a system which is a super-set of the
> functionality there...a sort of "persistent pub/sub". There's certainly no
> reason why a system such as I described can't implement the functionality
> described in JEP 24.
> With this in mind, perhaps we can agree that these are two separate systems
> and as such should be pursued independently of each other.
No, I don't think that is needed at all. How about we tackle both trains
of thought, but treat DJ's as the "core protocol for the Ultimate
Generic PubSub", separate from any storage or management functionality.
Then we take a storage "add-on" or "extension" that could prossibly be
independant in its own right (not inherently tied to pubsub) and a
topic/thread management mechanism (also not inherently tied to pubsub)
and tie the three together for Dave's work? Much of this storage and
topic management would be based on JINC's work since they are much
farther along in that, I gather. The key thing is to keep everything
modular, and most functionalities separate from the others so they can
be used independantly.
I'm just saying don't give up hope yet that a universal pubsub can be
made that makes everyone happy.
/\ Adam Theo, Age 22, Tallahassee FL USA
//\\ Email & Jabber: theo at theoretic.com
// \\ (Boycotting AOL, therefore no AIM or ICQ)
=//====\\= Theoretic Solutions: http://www.theoretic.com
// || \\ "Bringing Ideas Together"
|| Jabber Protocol: http://www.jabber.org
|| "The Coolest IM on the Planet"
|| "A Free-Market Socialist Patriotic American
|| Buddhist Political Philosopher."
More information about the Standards