Hi Matt, It sounds good to me, as soon as we move forward on 5.19.x soon after 5.18.x. Jakarta namespace could be quickly expected by users as some frameworks already switched to it (spring boot, camel, ...), so client libs will have to move fast. For Spring 6, it's not very difficult, I already did it. I can keep for 5.19.x, but it's possible to include for 5.18.x (Karaf already supports it, so the broker in Karaf can work).
Regards JB On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 8:35 PM Matt Pavlovich <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hey JB- > > Thoughts on consolidating the pre-jakarta work into a quick v5.18.x and then > doing a v5.19.x for jakarta? > > My thought is that we could consolidate v5.16.x and v5.17.x support work into > a v5.18.x for all javax.* supported build going forward and then start 5.19.x > w/ the jakarta namespace and dependency changes. > > v5.18.x (JDK 11 minimum, JMS 2.0, javax.jms, Spring 5) > v5.19.x (JDK 11 minimum, JMS 2.0, jakarta.jms, Spring 6) > > -Matt Pavlovich > > > On Jan 8, 2023, at 1:19 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi guys, > > > > I started to work on ActiveMQ 5.18.x major release preparation. > > > > Basically, I propose to include (as major changes, in addition of all > > others more "minor" changes :)): > > - JMS 2.x support (mostly client and first part broker) > > - Spring 6 update > > - Jakarta namespace support > > > > I should have the first PRs ready for review very soon. > > > > I would like to propose a first 5.18.0 in Feb. > > > > Thoughts ? > > Regards > > JB >
