Thanks Robbie. I'm planning for us to take a look at both the Proton-J change and Qpid JMS Client next month (I was the original contributor if the Qpid JMS Client SCRAM SHA module, after all) , so except to see some patches from us on the reviewboard for comment. I don't think we'll be able to take on corresponding changes for Proton-C (my C skills are 17 years rusty), so we'll have to leave those to others.
For the Proton-J change and Qpid JMS Client releases, we don't need these changes urgently, so I was hoping to piggyback if there is a release due in the next four to six weeks, otherwise we might push things forward ourselves. On 30 June 2017 at 11:06, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> wrote: > On 29 June 2017 at 13:06, Keith W <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Are there release dates in mind for Proton-J (0.20.0) and Qpid JMS (0.24.0)? > > Nothing specific no, except not next week due to holidays etc (unless > others feel like doing a release...). Essentially they are mostly > released whenever theres something interesting enough ready or it > seems too long otherwise. > >> >> We are moving towards a Qpid Broker J major release next quarter. The >> release backlog includes QPID-7787 [1] which will utilise the AMQP 1.0 >> additional data field of the SASL outcome [2]. In order to be useful >> end to end, this will need a corresponding change in the Qpid JMS >> Client, QPIDJMS-294 [3], and a Proton J change to expose the data [4]. >> > > Perhaps also including checking the interaction with Dispatch, the c++ > broker, and proton-c plus bindings when using Cyrus, etc. > > I looked at Rob's patch on > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-1486 previously and > mentioned to him it seems like it will work (tests might show :P) > though I was hesitant whether it would be better to expose the value > explicitly than feeding it though the same API+fields as the > challenge/response. I did agree the things that might not work > shouldnt really happen and are mostly already an issue regardless > though. > > I haven't looked at the client side yet to see whats needed there. > Perhaps folks that wrote those/related bits might have a better idea? > :) > >> I want to understand the schedule so we can ensure the work on those >> JIRAs is ready for consideration/inclusion. >> >> cheers, Keith. >> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-7787 >> [2] >> http://docs.oasis-open.org/amqp/core/v1.0/os/amqp-core-security-v1.0-os.html#type-sasl-outcome >> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPIDJMS-294 >> [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-1486 >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
