[zeromq-dev] ZMQ_IDENTITY revisited

[Brian Granger]

Martin,

> Given, that ZMQ_IDENTITY is a biggest source of complexity in the
> codebase (while at the same time being semantically unsound) I'll have
> to remove it from the codebase sooner or later be able to develop the
> product further.
>
> So, what will happen is that we'll have 0MQ/2.x (old API, ZMQ_IDENTITY),
> 0MQ/3.x (new API, ZMQ_IDENTITY) and 0MQ/4.x (new API, no ZMQ_IDENTITY).

I think this plan sounds good as long as the new API has the same
capabilities as ZMQ_IDENTITY.

Cheers,

Brian

> 0MQ/2.x is maintained by Pieter, 0MQ/4.x (the master) will be maintained
> by myself, but it's not clear who's going to do maintenance (backporting
> bugfixes etc.) of 0MQ/3.x.
>
> If there's no maintainer, the version is going to bitrot pretty quickly,
> adding additional trouble for binding maintainers while providing no
> added value.
>
> So, my question is: Is there anybody out there who needs ZMQ_IDENTITY so
> badly as to volunteer for maintaining 0MQ/3.0?
>
> If not so, there's no much point in releasing 0MQ/3.0 and we should move
> directly to 0MQ/4.0, ie. new API without ZMQ_IDENTITY.
>
> Martin
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
>



-- 
Brian E. Granger
Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo
bgranger at calpoly.edu and ellisonbg at gmail.com