As with the other times this was discussed, I think 1) makes most sense still. If you think the bits are in a releaseable state now, then it seems sensible to proceed with the existing stable base rather than expanding and likely delaying the release yet again. Releasing gets the finished changes people have been waiting for out, and you can start fresh on big changes for the next version at the front of a release cycle rather than lumping them in at the end. The next set of changes can then arrive on their own however soon they are ready for release, in a smaller targetted release.
On Wed, 6 May 2020 at 06:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I would like to release ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0. > > They include fixes affecting several users (on http proxy, on xstream CPU > use, etc) and couple of improvements. > > About 5.16.0, we have two options: > 1. I’m releasing as it is: it’s JDK 11 compliant at runtime, but the build is > not fully JDK 11. > 2. I’m removing leveldb, scala, and update the branch to fully build with JDK > 11. I can postpone this for 5.17.x with JMS 2.x support (already started). > > Thoughts ? > > Regards > JB
