[zeromq-dev] Linux.fr Article - User feedback on ZMQ (for french readers only)

Pieter Hintjens ph at imatix.com
Wed Nov 14 02:31:01 CET 2012


On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 3:02 AM, jeff murphy <jcmurphy at jeffmurphy.org> wrote:
>
> http://linuxfr.org/nodes/96358/comments/1407288

Ah, I thought the reason for Crossroads was our unacceptably
restrictive trademark policy. :-)

Since Sustrik used the occasion to try to trash our collective work,
I'll respond here, and for the record.

0MQ will live or die on its merits, as Brian says, and it's primary
merit has always been the community of smart engineers who are
determined to use 0MQ in their work, and who ask nothing more than to
be able to contribute on a fair and predictable basis, and who expect
that public contracts be documented and respected.

I've respect for Sustrik's work, but his way of working has caused
serious and avoidable trauma to 0MQ in the past, and will IMO cripple
any new project he works on. We tried the "Sustrik knows best and will
explain in code and white-papers" approach for years in 0MQ. It was
wasteful and painful. I'm not going to cite the specifics; everyone
who's been here for more than a year or so knows what I mean.

Having experienced the freedom of being able to contribute honestly
and openly to the code my business depends on, there's no way in hell
I'd give anyone, no matter how smart, a yes/no decision over my
contributions. I'd certainly not contribute to a BSD project where my
competitors can use my investment against me.

Nano will, at best, become a native C implementation of the ZMTP/2.0
protocol and 0MQ APIs, like we have Java and C# native stacks, and at
worst it will sink.

To think that 0MQ has such problems that the world is ready to step
onto an incompatible replacement is... a delusion.

-Pieter



More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list