Emails noting '5.16.0 soon' are getting a bit tedious given its description many times over several months as being ready for vote 'now', 'tomorrow', or 'next week'.
It's ok to actually release it. Other version numbers are available for future changes. Robbie On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 at 14:23, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi guys, > > After 5.15.13, I’m preparing ActiveMQ 5.16.0 with JDK 11 runtime and preview > on JMS 2.0 (as requested on Jira by some users). > > I will share more details soon about timing and 5.16.0 content. > > Regards > JB > > > Le 16 mai 2020 à 07:24, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > > Hi guys, > > > > Just to let you know that I’m still working on these releases preparation. > > I identify couple of issues I would like to fix. > > > > I plan to submit the releases to vote next week. > > > > Regards > > JB > > > >> Le 6 mai 2020 à 07:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <[email protected]> a écrit : > >> > >> 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 > > >
