Thanks folks! I see.

Just wondering, since the fix is client only, does it make sense to only
release a new patch version on the client but not on the broker? Or doing
that is more maintenance work than releasing a new patch version altogether?

Thanks,
Ken

On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 10:12 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net>
wrote:

> Hi Ken
>
> The website page is an indication for our users in terms of activity of
> each version. It’s mostly a way to encourage our users to upgrade to the
> latest version.
>
> However, under exceptional circumstances, new releases on inactive branches
> are always possible.
> To be honest, I was not in favor of doing 5.x releases. But as we received
> requests from users (still using 5.x and jdk8), in order to make our
> community happy, it’s ok for me.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> Le mar. 4 mars 2025 à 23:05, Ken Liao <kenlia...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> > 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 *Deprecated*: Reached end-of-life and is no longer maintained.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
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to