On May 19, 2014, at 1:35 PM, uromahn <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hmm, from the deafening silence I must assume that either of the two things > happened: > 1. People didn't read my post for some reason (and hence I am replying to my > own post to refresh this post), or > 2. There is no appetite supporting JMS 2.0 in ActiveMQ and hence people > ignored my post. As Claus stated, there hasn’t really been any demand for JMS 2.0 support so far. One reason is that, at this point, ActiveMQ still supports Java6. The JMS 2.0 spec mandates the use of some Java7 features and API’s (AutoClosable for example) which would likely require ActiveMQ to drop support for Java6. I’m not saying that won’t happen, but right now, that’s not on the 5.10 agenda and most of the ActiveMQ folks are really trying to get that out before tackling the “what next” kind of questions. That said, if you are interested in starting to pursue updating things to support JMS 2.0, we’d be happy to accept contributions. A branch on github that we could look at after 5.10 goes out would certainly be welcome. Note: there is also a issue about obtaining access to the JMS 2.0 TCK for testing compliance. That’s a completely separate issue, but if 100% compliance is important, it’s something that would need to be figured out. Dan > Anyways, if I won't see any feedback or comments to this post, I have to > assume that ActiveMQ will be a "dead-end" with regards to JMS 2.0 (and > future versions of JMS). > > Thanks, > -Uli > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Discussion-JMS-2-0-API-support-tp4681089p4681256.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Daniel Kulp [email protected] - http://dankulp.com/blog Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
