+1 > On Mar 4, 2025, at 5:23 PM, Christopher Shannon > <christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Ken, > > While you are right that we should generally not try and maintain > older releases, exceptions can always be made and in this specific > case I think it's an exception that makes sense as it's one that will > actually encourage upgrading. > > It's very common that brokers can be updated before clients can. The > bug that is fixed as part of AMQ-9418 is something that would prevent > a legacy user from ever being able to upgrade their brokers if they > have even a single client that can't upgrade. A lot of people have use > cases where clients are either not controlled by them (ie customers) > or run on legacy systems and are much longer or slower to upgrade off > of something like an older JDK. > > By fixing this bug it allows users that have older clients that are > unable to upgrade for whatever reason to be able to move forward with > upgrading all of the rest of their clients and brokers. > > Chris > > > On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 5:06 PM Ken Liao <kenlia...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi JB and Chris. >> >> My concern about doing so is that it may create false expectations for >> users and add more burden to the maintainers. On the webpage >> https://activemq.apache.org/components/classic/download/ , it states that " >> *Deprecated*: Reached end-of-life and is no longer maintained. Deprecated >> versions do not receive updates." If we provide an exception for a >> functional fix , those users on 5.16.x may never migrate because they know >> an exception is possible. Is there something else (like a blog post on >> migration) we can do to help those Java 8 community users without releasing >> updates to 5.16 and 5.17? >> >> Thanks, >> Ken >> >> On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 3:11 PM Christopher Shannon < >> christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi JB, >>> >>> Sounds good, I agree that if we are doing the releases we should also back >>> port a couple of the other important fixes as well. >>> >>> Chris >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 3:27 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> It’s a good point. I see a couple of important fixes that would be good >>> to >>>> have in 5.16.8 / 5.17.7. >>>> >>>> We are not supposed to actively maintain these branches. But it’s a fair >>>> request for our jdk8 users still. >>>> >>>> I don’t see problem to do new releases on these branches for important >>>> fixes. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> JB >>>> >>>> Le jeu. 27 févr. 2025 à 14:24, Christopher Shannon < >>>> christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> a écrit : >>>> >>>>> That should have said "backported the important exception translation >>>> bug" >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 8:23 AM Christopher Shannon < >>>>> christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I just noticed that we never released version 5.16.8 or 5.17.7 and >>> both >>>>> of >>>>>> those releases have backported the import exception translation bug >>> fix >>>>>> from https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-9418 >>>>>> >>>>>> I think these are important to release, especially 5.16.8, because >>> it's >>>>>> the last JDK 8 compatible version. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>> >>>>>> Chris >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@activemq.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@activemq.apache.org > For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact > >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@activemq.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@activemq.apache.org For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact
