Hi, I don’t believe the transition to EE 11 requires an ActiveMQ 7 version bump, as we don't use EE 11 extensively and haven't changed the minimum Java version yet.
Regarding the EE scope, the main impact for us would be Servlet 6.1 and WebSocket 2.2 (necessitating the Jetty 12.1 upgrade we discussed). While Spring 7 moves to JPA 3.2/4.0, we don't utilize those features. Similarly, the impact of Bean Validation 3.1 is minimal. Outside of EE, a Jackson 3 update will be required, but it won't necessitate changes to our code. Since we have already planned for Jetty 12 in the 6.x series, I believe staying within the 6.x versioning is sufficient. I already started a PR to experiment the Spring 7 update (to clearly identify the impact). We will be able to decide with a "concrete" change. Regards, JB On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 6:29 PM Matt Pavlovich <[email protected]> wrote: > Yep, I tried to summarize the information b/w the plans for 6.3 and 6.4 > for reference and to note that the plans for a non-Spring runtime are > independent of the ActiveMQ major version and any presence of Spring > support to address Chris’ comments. > > I think we are all in favor of updating to Spring 7— just need to decide > if it is reasonable to do it in ActiveMQ 6.4 or if it should be ActiveMQ > 7.0 due to bump in EE alignment. Spring updated their major version to 7 — > is part of that due to the EE 11 alignment? > > In summary: > > Does the jump in minimum EE spec alignment to EE 11 warrant an ActiveMQ > major version bump? > > I’m leaning towards it should warrant a bump to ActiveMQ 7.0. > > -Matt Pavlovich > > > On Mar 21, 2026, at 10:45 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > FYI, I said in 6.4 for Spring 7 (not 6.3). > > > > 6.3 is as planned (still Spring 6). > > > > The purpose of this thread is to decide when to update to Spring 7. As > it's > > a not a core change on the runtime (still using Spring), I'm more in > favor > > to keep Spring based runtime for the 6.x series. > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 4:28 PM Matt Pavlovich <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Removing Spring entirely, is really — provide an alternate boot+config > >> option. Then the option is to make the new boot option the default (ie > >> Spring no longer required). There is no downside to keeping the old > Spring > >> wiring around for compatibility (the xbean annotations are in a > comment, so > >> there is no compile or runtime dependency). That will allow for gradual > >> conversion of the unit tests and give us time to write spring -> new > thing > >> config converters. > >> > >> Here is our current dependency matrix: > >> https://activemq.apache.org/components/classic/download/ > >> > >> Planned for 6.3 > >> > >> JDK [17, 26) > >> Spring [6.2, 6.3) > >> Jetty [12.0, 12.1) > >> EE 9 > >> > >> JB’s proposal is (check my work): > >> > >> JDK [17, 26) > >> Spring [7, 7.1) > >> Jetty [12.1, 12.2) > >> EE 11 > >> > >> I don’t know what all is included in the Spring 7 upgrade; however, the > >> two-step EE version bump seems worthy of a discussion if a major version > >> bump is warranted. The new boot and config would be _new_ modules, so we > >> can add them in a 7.1, 7.2, etc. > >> > >> -Matt > >> > >>> On Mar 20, 2026, at 4:29 PM, Christopher Shannon < > >> [email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Alright, if we are removing Spring entirely for ActiveMQ 7 then we can > >>> upgrade to Spring 7.x for ActiveMQ 6.4. > >>> > >>> Spring 6.2.x is almost EOL and I have no doubt there will eventually > be a > >>> CVE that pops up so I think we need to go with Spring 7.0 at some point > >> in > >>> ActiveMQ 6.x > >>> > >>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 5:22 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> My proposal was to remove spring for ActiveMQ 7. I have a prototype > for > >>>> that. > >>>> > >>>> So I would prefer to stay with 6 series with Spring. > >>>> > >>>> Just me €0.01 > >>>> > >>>> Regards > >>>> JB > >>>> > >>>> Le ven. 20 mars 2026 à 21:47, Christopher Shannon < > >>>> [email protected]> a écrit : > >>>> > >>>>> Wasn't the plan to get rid of Spring entirely for ActiveMQ 7.0 or at > >>>> least > >>>>> make it optional? Will that work be ready, I haven't looked to see > what > >>>>> needs to be done to finish decoupling other than the configuration > >>>> piece. I > >>>>> know we talked about a builder pattern or some other way to > configure a > >>>>> broker. > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 4:27 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > [email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> If we couple that with JDK 25, ActiveMQ 7 makes sense. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Regards > >>>>>> JB > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 8:24 PM Matt Pavlovich <[email protected] > > > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> I think Jetty 12 to 12.1 won’t be too complicated. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I think we need to get the Jetty 12 upgrade merged (the blocker is > >>>> web > >>>>>>> console EL templating isn’t working yet) into 6.3.x. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Might be good to go ahead and call it ActiveMQ 7 w/ Spring 7 and EE > >>>> 11— > >>>>>>> effectively mark ActiveMQ 6.x as the transition to more stable > >>>>>>> JDK/Spring/EE alignment going forward. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -Matt > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Mar 20, 2026, at 11:17 AM, Christopher Shannon < > >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> One thing to be aware of is that Spring 7.x requires EE 11. So it > >>>>> would > >>>>>>>> require both upgrading to Jetty 12.1.x (not Jetty 12.0.x) as well > >>>> as > >>>>>>>> Jakarta EE 11 and I think we might only be using EE 9 right now. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I'm not sure what issues might arise from bumping to EE 11, maybe > >>>>> none > >>>>>> as > >>>>>>>> long as we don't use the new features. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Spring 6.2.x is EOL in 3 months so it probably makes sense but > >>>>>> something > >>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>> be aware of. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 10:34 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > >>>>> [email protected] > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hi folks, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> For the coming ActiveMQ 6.4.0 release, I propose to upgrade to > >>>>> Spring > >>>>>>> 7.x. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Spring 7.x is still compatible with JDK 17 but also has better > >>>>> support > >>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>> JDK 25. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> The reason why I'm proposing ActiveMQ 6.4.x is because Spring 7.x > >>>>>> would > >>>>>>>>> require Jetty 12.x. > >>>>>>>>> Matt started the Jetty 12.x update, so we have a dependency to > >>>> this > >>>>>>> work to > >>>>>>>>> have a clean Spring 7.x upgrade. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I will chat with Matt if he needs help on the Jetty 12.x update. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Are you ok to plan Spring 7.x update for ActiveMQ 6.4.0 ? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Regards > >>>>>>>>> JB > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >>>>>>> For further information, visit: > https://activemq.apache.org/contact > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact > > >
