Fair enough. I can look at Jetty 9 probably tomorrow if I had to guess. John
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 9:34 PM Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> wrote: > ARTEMIS-120 was a copy and paste error.. I meant ARTEMIS-119. > > I tried to simply update the version but there is some API changes so > it wasn't a simple update. > > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 9:32 PM, John D. Ament <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Clebert, > > > > I'm assuming you meant the upgrade to Netty, not Jetty. Unless you also > > want to upgrade to Jetty 9.2 as well (seems like there's a mix of 8.1 > and 6 > > in the code base). > > > > Anyways PR is open. > > > > John > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 8:38 PM Clebert Suconic < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> I did some admin on the JIRAs, cleaning solved ones, etc... > >> > >> > >> and I believe this could be a nice plan for a 1.0.1 (* link at the end > >> of the message). My idea was to fix examples, small issues and improve > >> usability. > >> We would start adding openWire tests and have 1.1.0 a bit more > >> substantial on OpenWire improvements. > >> > >> > >> I could come up with performance improvements on Stomp / OpenWire.. > >> but I guess I will wait 1.1.0 on that one. (maybe we could come up > >> with a 1.0.2 as I think 1.0.1 should be done very shortly). > >> > >> > >> All the unassigned ones are good opportunities for committers, and > >> they all seem easy to be done. > >> > >> > >> In special I would like to highlight the Upgrade to Jetty > >> (ARTEMIS-120) as an easy one that needs some love? Volunteers for this > >> one? > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Please take some time over the list: and I would appreciate any help > >> on this admin work :) > >> > >> > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ARTEMIS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%201.0.1%20ORDER%20BY%20assignee%20DESC%2C%20priority%20DESC > >> > > > > -- > Clebert Suconic > http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected] > http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com >
