OK - I've landed the 0-10 broker code onto trunk. By default the default and java test profiles will still use 0-8/0-9 code...
Let me know if we see any issues (or at least more test failures than usual :-) )... As per the other thread - I've seen some failures with the new Acknowledge/Failover tests... but I see these also on the old code... Cheers, Rob 2009/10/23 Rajith Attapattu <[email protected]> > Rob, your effort is much appreciated. > It would be nice to have both brokers speaking 0-10 for the up comming > release. > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Robert Godfrey > <[email protected]> wrote: > > OK - given the opinion on here I'll aim to get the 0-10 Java work onto > trunk > > this weekend sometime. > > > > My apologies in advance if I inadvertently break any tests... thing have > > been passing on my machine(s) but some of the Java client tests are, > shall > > we say, a little temperamental :-) > > > > I'll also post something about the differences that I know about between > the > > AMQP interpretation on the Java broker and the C++ broker... Principally > I > > think these were relating to the handling of credit on message.release, > and > > whether it is allowed to "release" non-acquired messages. > > > > Finally thanks to all those who originally put 0-10 in the Java client... > > most of the work was already done for me - this was mostly a task of > > removing 0-8isms from the Broker code. > > > > Cheers, > > Rob > > > > 2009/10/22 Andrew Stitcher <[email protected]> > > > >> On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 13:02 -0400, Rafael Schloming wrote: > >> > Robert Godfrey wrote: > >> > > ... > >> > > I'm looking to get everything working on a the same port tonight... > >> the > >> > > other tasks are less high priority I think. > >> > > >> > This sounds very encouraging. It would be good to have the Java Broker > >> > speaking 0-10 for the upcoming release. Do you think it would be > >> > reasonable to land the branch in time? I imagine it would be > preferable > >> > to get it in and stabilized rather than let it diverge over the course > >> > of the release. > >> > >> Given that it sounds like you've introduced no regressions to the java > >> broker, I'd much rather have it landed on the trunk sooner (in the next > >> few days) and then fixed up on trunk, rather than leaving it later and > >> risking java not being in the 0.6 release at all. > >> > >> Andrew > >> > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation > >> Project: http://qpid.apache.org > >> Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected] > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > Regards, > > Rajith Attapattu > Red Hat > http://rajith.2rlabs.com/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation > Project: http://qpid.apache.org > Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected] > >
