+1 (non-binding)

Upgraded from 5.15.1 to 5.15.2 in our staging environment; no issues, but
then again 5.15.1 was also working fine for us. Using the auto transport.
Clients tested were an ActiveMQ 5.14.1 Java client and a C# client using
NMS ActiveMQ 1.7.2. The NMS client sometimes takes up to 30 seconds to
connect, but I don't think that's new, and is not specific to the auto
transport. Also tested with hawtio (dropping in the latest 1.5.4, default
offline version) - all in all looks good.

Regards,
Bruce D

On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 3:57 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>
wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Oct 18, 2017, 12:56, at 12:56, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >On 17 October 2017 at 15:37, Christopher Shannon
> ><[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Hi Everyone,
> >>
> >> I have created the ActiveMQ 5.15.2 release and it's ready for a vote.
> >>
> >> The list of resolved issues is here:
> >>
> >https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> projectId=12311210&version=12341669
> >>
> >> You can get the release artifacts here:
> >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/activemq/activemq/5.15.2/
> >>
> >> Maven repository is at:
> >>
> >https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapacheactivemq-1151/
> >>
> >> Source tag:
> >https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=activemq.git;a=commit;h=
> 9e595d8674456810ee3bd2d4a9920ed8b680937b
> >>
> >> Please vote to approve this release.  The vote will remain open for
> >72 hours.
> >>
> >> [ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache ActiveMQ 5.15.2
> >> [ ] -1 (provide specific comments)
> >>
> >> Here's my +1
> >
> >+1 (non-binding)
> >
> >I checked things over as follows:
> >- Verified the signature and checksum files.
> >- Checked licence and notice files are present in the archives.
> >- Ran the source build and tested with the sanity test profile.
> >- Used the broker from the tar.gz binary to run some AMQP client
> >examples.
> >- Used the staging repo to run the Qpid JMS master tests against the
> >broker.
> >
> >Robbie
>

Reply via email to