Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update Stomp Client Recommendation in Docs [SPR-15624] #20183

Closed
spring-issuemaster opened this issue Jun 6, 2017 · 2 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@spring-issuemaster
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jun 6, 2017

Gunnar Hillert opened SPR-15624 and commented

In the reference guide we are referring multiple time to an outdated and unmaintained version of the Stomp JavaScript client stomp.js:

https://github.com/jmesnil/stomp-websocket

Which library would we recommend going forward?

It looks like there are a few competing forks (no clear winner) around:

https://github.com/JSteunou/webstomp-client
https://github.com/stomp-js/stomp-websocket

There is also an open question on this on Stackoverflow:

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41119274/stomp-js-is-out-of-date-and-no-longer-maintained-which-stomp-client-to-use-wit

This may also raise a general question on the State of Stomp as a preferred means for doing websocket-based messaging.

Also, how does it relate to our Reactive WebSocket Support in WebFlux?

How does it relate to #19101


Affects: 5.0 RC1

Referenced from: commits 8670411, 513461d, 357fb48

Backported to: 4.3.14

@spring-issuemaster

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Jun 7, 2017

Rossen Stoyanchev commented

Thanks ghillert and sorry for the slow response.

Indeed the state of things around stomp.js isn't ideal. On the other hand STOMP is quite simple from a client perspective, and not changing that much, so while the forked state is unfortunate, those forks I believe are fairly active, so it shouldn't be a show stopper in practice.

As for STOMP and WebFlux that is still the plan to do along with SockJS just not in 5.0 since it is a major effort and just like with Spring MVC there will be very little or no shared code. We could also revisit our present thinking and experience with STOMP but since SockJS continues to support text messages only, STOMP is still a very strong candidate. I don't think the situation with stomp.js changes that much.

@spring-issuemaster

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Jan 18, 2018

Rossen Stoyanchev commented

Resolved via 357fb4.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.