FYI, moving this discussion back to the dev list as it belongs there. On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 3:09 PM Christopher Shannon < christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What exactly are you proposing? Full support would be a tremendous amount > of work. I started a thread on this already a while back here: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-JMS-2-0-support-in-5-x-going-forward-td4757779.html > > My issue here is the lack of clarity. I have no clue what you are > proposing but it needs to be defined so we don't mislead users by claiming > there is JMS 2.0 support when there isn't. I listed out possible paths > forward in that other thread. > > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 12:04 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: > >> It’s something that we already discussed and I moved forward on the PR. >> >> I propose to move forward on JMS 2.0 support. >> >> If the community agree, and tests are fine, I don’t see any issue to >> support it in 5.17.0 as best effort. >> >> Anyway, I will propose the PR, and see when to include it. >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> > Le 18 mai 2021 à 17:36, Christopher Shannon < >> christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> a écrit : >> > >> > Since when is JMS 2.0 supposed to be supported by 5.17.0? >> > >> > None of the features are implemented on the server side for the new API >> > calls. This was brought up in a dev discussion that there won't be JMS >> 2.0 >> > support on the server side in this release. >> > >> > On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:29 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> He’s not PMC but committer, so he can help anyway ;) >> >> >> >> Regards >> >> JB >> >> >> >>> Le 18 mai 2021 à 17:23, COURTAULT Francois < >> >> francois.courta...@thalesgroup.com> a écrit : >> >>> >> >>> Hello, >> >>> >> >>> I don't think Romain is still the PMC for TomEE. >> >>> >> >>> Best Regards. >> >>> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net> >> >>> Sent: mardi 18 mai 2021 17:19 >> >>> To: us...@activemq.apache.org >> >>> Subject: Re: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or >> 3.0 >> >> ? >> >>> >> >>> Hi, >> >>> >> >>> I’m sure I can ask help from Romain about TomEE releases ;) >> >>> >> >>> Regards >> >>> JB >> >>> >> >>>> Le 18 mai 2021 à 17:09, COURTAULT Francois < >> >> francois.courta...@thalesgroup.com> a écrit : >> >>>> >> >>>> Hello Jean-Baptiste, >> >>>> >> >>>> We are using ActiveMQ in TomEE context. >> >>>> So I am just curious about when this version could be included in >> TomEE >> >> releases. I will push for that. >> >>>> >> >>>> Best Regards. >> >>>> >> >>>> -----Original Message----- >> >>>> From: Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net >> >> >> >>>> Sent: mardi 18 mai 2021 17:05 >> >>>> To: us...@activemq.apache.org <mailto:us...@activemq.apache.org> >> >>>> Subject: Re: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or >> >> 3.0 ? >> >>>> >> >>>> Hi, >> >>>> >> >>>> The purpose of the RC is to cut an early release (kind of "cut >> >> SNAPSHOT") to allow users to test it before the first "official" >> release. >> >>>> >> >>>> What I can propose to you is: >> >>>> >> >>>> 1. I need couple of weeks to open the PRs and merge it (I’m on JDK11 >> >> now, identifying/fixing/disabling some tests) 2. When done, I will >> inform >> >> you on the mailing list allowing you to test using the SNAPSHOTs >> >> (5.17.0-SNAPSHOT) 3. If I don’t see any blocker on SNAPSHOT, then I >> will >> >> move forward on 5.17.0 release >> >>>> >> >>>> Does it sound good to you ? >> >>>> >> >>>> Regards >> >>>> JB >> >>>> >> >>>>> Le 18 mai 2021 à 16:59, Simon Billingsley >> >> <simon.billings...@matrixx.com.INVALID> a écrit : >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Thanks for the details information. >> >>>>> I am interested in the Log4J 2 upgrade. >> >>>>> How long does the release take after the RC process normally? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Best regards, >> >>>>> Simon. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On 18 May 2021, at 15:53, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net >> >> <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net> <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net <mailto: >> j...@nanthrax.net >> >>>> <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net><mailto: >> j...@nanthrax.net >> >> <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>>>> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Hi François, >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ActiveMQ 5.17.0 will support JMS 2.0. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Basically, what I’m planning for ActiveMQ 5.17.0: >> >>>>> - JDK11 build >> >>>>> - Spring 5 >> >>>>> - Log4j2 >> >>>>> - JMS 2.0 >> >>>>> >> >>>>> About date target, I’m working on JDK11 build now and the other PRs >> >> will follow. I would like to submit a first 5.17 RC end of June. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Regards >> >>>>> JB >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Le 18 mai 2021 à 16:48, COURTAULT Francois < >> >> francois.courta...@thalesgroup.com <mailto: >> >> francois.courta...@thalesgroup.com> <mailto: >> >> francois.courta...@thalesgroup.com <mailto: >> >> francois.courta...@thalesgroup.com>><mailto: >> >> francois.courta...@thalesgroup.com <mailto: >> >> francois.courta...@thalesgroup.com> <mailto: >> >> francois.courta...@thalesgroup.com <mailto: >> >> francois.courta...@thalesgroup.com>>>> a écrit : >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Hello, >> >>>>> >> >>>>> The question to be answered is in the Subject. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Best Regards. >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
