Hi, That's OK for me. My point is really to incrementally provide new JMS/Jakarta messaging features on 6.x releases. That's our top priority.
FYI, I already created a builder to provide a BrokerService on the branch. I also reduce the dependencies by a "real" plugins system (more modulith). Regards JB On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 1:15 PM Christopher Shannon <christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think for each 6.x branch we should just keep implementing more JMS 2 and > Jakara messaging updates (6.1, 6.2, 6.3) etc and keep working towards being > fully compatible. > > It would make sense to me to release 7.0 when everything is fully > implemented for Jakarta messaging. I think improving configuration and > making Spring optional makes sense so it doesn't have to be a dependency. > Having dependencies is fine and some are necessary and useful (Jetty, > Guava, etc) but I think in general we have too many dependencies and could > reduce some which would help with maintenance and CVEs. I think supporting > JSON or YAML makes sense but I think we should also create a nice Builder > for creating a broker. Many things have gone to Java configuration and the > builder pattern is quite common now for configuration so it would be nice > to have a Builder for creating a broker easily that is embedded as well. > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 9:21 AM Francois Papon <francois.pa...@openobject.fr> > wrote: > > > Hi JB, > > > > Thanks for the roadmap! > > > > Just for the note, the 5.x branch will be update only for CVEs purpose? > > (dependencies or source code) > > > > If so, which minor version of 5.x are in the maintenance mode? I guess > > only the latest 5.18.x right? > > > > regards, > > > > François > > > > On 12/01/2024 19:22, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > Happy new year to all ! > > > > > > After the festive break, I'm back on ActiveMQ :) > > > I would like to discuss about the roadmap for ActiveMQ > > > 6.0.x/6.1.x/6.2.x/7.x(future): > > > > > > - For 6.0.x branch, I propose to include fixes and minor dependencies > > > updates (I have some PRs on the way, Matt also worked on different > > > topics) > > > - For 6.1.x branch, I propose to add a new round of JMS 2.x/3.x > > > features support and include major dependencies updates (if there are > > > :)). It can also include non breaking change refactoring. > > > - For 6.2.x branch, I propose to add another round of JMS 2.x/3.x > > > features support and new major updates compared to 6.1.x > > > It would be great to target 6.5.x for instance for full JMS 2.x/3.x > > support. > > > > > > - For 7.x, I started a prototype to set Spring as optional, having a > > > core loader and new configuration format (in addition to activemq.xml, > > > I have activemq.json and activemq.yml for instance). As this is a > > > major milestone, we could have some breaking changes. Even if 7.x is > > > not the top priority for now (I think we have to focus on full JMS 2/3 > > > support right now), it gives perspective to the community. > > > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > > > Regards > > > JB > >
