date:20171106

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1649: ARTEMIS-1507 ActiveMQConnectionTimedOut...

2017-11-06 Thread dudaerich

GitHub user dudaerich opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1649

ARTEMIS-1507 ActiveMQConnectionTimedOutException is thrown even though no 
timeout expired

When the execution of code jumps out of the while cycle,
it should check whether the blocking-call-timeout expired or not.
If no, ActiveMQUnBlockedException should be thrown
instead of ActiveMQConnectionTimedOutException.

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/dudaerich/activemq-artemis ARTEMIS-1507

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1649.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1649


commit 5f8cef98659eff02d33f89105b53eabf9996379a
Author: Erich Duda 
Date:   2017-11-03T14:29:57Z

ARTEMIS-1507 ActiveMQConnectionTimedOutException is thrown even though no 
timeout expired

When the execution of code jumps out of the while cycle,
it should check whether the blocking-call-timeout expired or not.
If no, ActiveMQUnBlockedException should be thrown
instead of ActiveMQConnectionTimedOutException.




---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1648: ARTEMIS-1506 Synchronization issue duri...

2017-11-06 Thread dudaerich

GitHub user dudaerich opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1648

ARTEMIS-1506 Synchronization issue during failover in ClientSessionImpl

The temporary deadlock is avoided by removing 'synchronized' from
ClientSessionImpl::getCredits method. As the method uses only
a producerCreditManger, only this object is guarded against
the parallel access.

I've run the Artemis test suite with `tests` profile with and without this 
commit and the test results were the same. It didn't introduce any regression.

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/dudaerich/activemq-artemis ARTEMIS-1506

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1648.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1648


commit 903f66851b8e793e910583a553e09a2485be5b68
Author: Erich Duda 
Date:   2017-11-03T15:19:54Z

ARTEMIS-1506 Synchronization issue during failover in ClientSessionImpl

The temporary deadlock is avoided by removing 'synchronized' from
ClientSessionImpl::getCredits method. As the method uses only
a producerCreditManger, only this object is guarded against
the parallel access.




---

ActiveMQ C# implementation - Unable to write data to the transport connection: An existing connection

2017-11-06 Thread dipoody

Hi Team, 

I am getting the following error while try to establish ActiveMQ session 
after creating successful connection. 
*“Unable to write data to the transport connection: An existing connection 
was forcibly closed by the remote host” * 

I am using Apache.NMS.ActiveMQ dll for connecting to queue using C#.net. 

Some days back this was connecting to queue. I am using the URL to connect 
as following 
*"activemq:ssl://:4443?wireFormat.maxInactivityDuration=0"* 

Please find the code snippet used for connecting the queue: 

try 
{ 
connecturi = new Uri(connectionURI); 
try 
{ 
factory = new NMSConnectionFactory(connecturi); 
} 
catch (Exception ex) 
{ 
factory = new 
Apache.NMS.ActiveMQ.ConnectionFactory(connecturi); 
} 
//System.Net.ServicePointManager.Expect100Continue = false; 
using (connection = factory.CreateConnection()) 
{ 
   using (session = connection.CreateSession()) 
   { 
destination = SessionUtil.GetDestination(session, 
"queue://"); //Name of the Queue 
using (consumer = 
session.CreateConsumer(destination)) 
{   
connection.Start(); 
IMessage message; 
Thread.Sleep(1000); 
while ((message = 
consumer.Receive(TimeSpan.FromMilliseconds(100))) != null) 
{ 
ITextMessage txtMsg = message as 
ITextMessage; 
string body = txtMsg.Text; 
resultSet.Add(body);
 
} 
} 
if (session != null) 
{ 
session.Close(); 
} 
if (connection != null) 
{ 
connection.Close(); 
connection = null; 
} 
session = null; 
} 
} 

} 
catch (Exception ex) 
{ 
if (session != null) 
{ 
session.Close(); 
} 
if (connection != null) 
{ 
connection.Close(); 
connection = null; 
} 
session = null; 
return resultSet; 
} 

Could you guys please provide a solution for this? 




--
Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1647: ARTEMIS-1365 Advisory consumers listed ...

2017-11-06 Thread gaohoward

GitHub user gaohoward opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1647

ARTEMIS-1365 Advisory consumers listed in Console

Openwire clients create consumers to advisory topics to receive
notifications. As a result there are internal queues created
on advisory topics. Those consumer shouldn't be exposed via
management APIs which are used by the Console

To fix that the broker doesn't register any queues from
advisory addresses.

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/gaohoward/activemq-artemis amaster_1365

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1647.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1647


commit 02585ea84d5a8719c56e5cf36b6d59aa33f2a3de
Author: Howard Gao 
Date:   2017-11-07T04:09:08Z

ARTEMIS-1365 Advisory consumers listed in Console

Openwire clients create consumers to advisory topics to receive
notifications. As a result there are internal queues created
on advisory topics. Those consumer shouldn't be exposed via
management APIs which are used by the Console

To fix that the broker doesn't register any queues from
advisory addresses.




---

Re: Twitter

2017-11-06 Thread Michael André Pearce

I believe we have now passed both getting 3x +1 pmc votes and 72hours have 
passed. I’ll re-activate with just pmc added to it as admins

Sent from my iPhone

> On 6 Nov 2017, at 15:24, Clebert Suconic  wrote:
> 
> so, do we have consensus now? can we reactivate it?
> 
>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Martyn Taylor  wrote:
>> +1 from me
>> 
>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 12:43 AM, Christopher Shannon <
>> christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> I think lazy concensus is ok.  As long as no one has any objections I would
>>> think it's ok to move ahead with it under PMC control as Tim pointed out.
>>> But Tim is right that should give it 72 hours for people to see the thread
>>> and comment.
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 7:28 PM, Clebert Suconic >> wrote:
>>> 
 Do we a vote even for that? It seemed a no brainer.
 
 On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 6:56 PM Michael André Pearce <
 michael.andre.pea...@me.com> wrote:
 
> Should be deactivated now.
> 
> 
> 
>> On 1 Nov 2017, at 22:51, Michael André Pearce <
> michael.andre.pea...@me.com> wrote:
>> 
>> That would be my apologies on that i was setting up to make sure it
> would work. I didn’t realise the ramifications I will disable it whilst
 we
> await the time to elapse.
>> 
>> Please accept my apologies
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
 On 1 Nov 2017, at 22:49, Timothy Bish  wrote:
 
 On 11/01/2017 06:40 PM, Michael André Pearce wrote:
 Agreed PMC ultimately will have overall control.
 
 This is why the mail before about the “owner” account to be the
>>> PMC.
 
>>> 
>>> Problem being that there is now a "official" ActiveMQ twitter
>>> account
> that is not currently owned or controlled by the PMC that was created
 from
> a discussion that did not give the standard 72 hours for discussion and
> either consensus or lazy consensus to occur.
>>> 
 Sent from my iPhone
 
>> On 1 Nov 2017, at 22:24, Timothy Bish 
>>> wrote:
>> 
>> On 11/01/2017 06:13 PM, Michael André Pearce wrote:
>> Also a shout out for committers and pmc, if you want to be added
>>> as
> we set this up we will need your twitter handles (I have some peoples
>>> but
> not all)
> Ultimately the PMC needs to decide which committers would be given
> access as per the Apache social media policy.
> 
>> Cheers
>> Mike
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On 1 Nov 2017, at 22:11, Michael André Pearce <
> michael.andre.pea...@me.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I have sent a mail to the PMC. But in the interest of being
>>> open,
> will share on the Dev mail list also.
>>> 
>>> We are slowly setting this up to check all would work etc etc.
>>> 
>>> We have set the “owner” account to the private pmc mail address
>>> as
> per Apache guidelines, it seems there might be some filter on the
>>> private
> mail list as it seems the verify email from twitter is not received.
>>> 
>>> I have such asked for advice from the PMC.
>>> 
>>> Incase anyone has done this for other Apache projects and have
 some
> advice how they handled this or get the verify email, it is welcome.
>>> 
>>> Cheers
>>> Mike
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
 On 1 Nov 2017, at 16:34, Michael André Pearce <
> michael.andre.pea...@me.com> wrote:
 
 Twitter for a group account has a nice level of owner, admin
>>> and
> user, that means committers can login with their own accounts and no
>>> one
> need the master/owners password for day to day, the owner account just
> needed to reset bits if ever needed.
 
 Owner = private pmc email (once we’ve setup all, this is easy
>>> to
> transfer)
 
 
 
 Sent from my iPhone
 
> On 1 Nov 2017, at 16:19, Michael André Pearce <
> michael.andre.pea...@me.com> wrote:
> 
> Yes, I would set it up sort it out then finally transfer the
> owner to private mail list so pmc have control
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On 1 Nov 2017, at 13:36, Timothy Bish 
> wrote:
>> 
>> Any official project social media account needs to be under
> control the project PMC, refer to
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/socialmedia
>> 
>>> On 11/01/2017 09:22 AM, Christopher Shannon wrote:
>>> +1
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1646: NO-JIRA update release documentation

2017-11-06 Thread jbertram

GitHub user jbertram opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1646

NO-JIRA update release documentation



You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/jbertram/activemq-artemis master_work

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1646.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1646


commit e5f54994b612a1cd5460731554d3b3785e1baf7f
Author: Justin Bertram 
Date:   2017-11-06T20:27:17Z

NO-JIRA update release documentation




---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1600: ARTEMIS-1471 Needs Bounds Checking on w...

2017-11-06 Thread asfgit

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1600


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1645: ARTEMIS-1504 Update to QpidJMS 0.27.0 a...

2017-11-06 Thread asfgit

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1645


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1645: ARTEMIS-1504 Update to QpidJMS 0.27.0 a...

2017-11-06 Thread tabish121

GitHub user tabish121 opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1645

ARTEMIS-1504 Update to QpidJMS 0.27.0 and Proton-j 0.23.0

Update to latest Qpid-JMS and match its Proton-J dependency

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/tabish121/activemq-artemis ARTEMIS-1504

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1645.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1645


commit 72d7ce61867a0d145cbf9005347f638279f33843
Author: Timothy Bish 
Date:   2017-11-06T17:07:32Z

ARTEMIS-1504 Update to QpidJMS 0.27.0 and Proton-j 0.23.0

Update to latest Qpid-JMS and match its Proton-J dependency




---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1642: NO-JIRA - minor updates to sample, so i...

2017-11-06 Thread asfgit

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1642


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1642: NO-JIRA - minor updates to sample, so it works...

2017-11-06 Thread clebertsuconic

Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1642
  
I will get your title from the PR.. and add to the commit... I can do that 
by check out a branch, amend and than push it.

the more info the better :)


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1642: NO-JIRA - minor updates to sample, so i...

2017-11-06 Thread pgfox

Github user pgfox commented on a diff in the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1642#discussion_r149118258
  
--- Diff: 
examples/features/standard/large-message/src/main/resources/jndi.properties ---
@@ -16,5 +16,5 @@
 # under the License.
 
 
java.naming.factory.initial=org.apache.activemq.artemis.jndi.ActiveMQInitialContextFactory
-connectionFactory.ConnectionFactory=tcp://localhost:61616

+connectionFactory.ConnectionFactory=tcp://localhost:61616?minLargeMessageSize=10240
--- End diff --

Thanks @clebertsuconic  :)




---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1642: NO-JIRA - minor updates to sample, so i...

2017-11-06 Thread clebertsuconic

Github user clebertsuconic commented on a diff in the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1642#discussion_r149117663
  
--- Diff: 
examples/features/standard/large-message/src/main/resources/jndi.properties ---
@@ -16,5 +16,5 @@
 # under the License.
 
 
java.naming.factory.initial=org.apache.activemq.artemis.jndi.ActiveMQInitialContextFactory
-connectionFactory.ConnectionFactory=tcp://localhost:61616

+connectionFactory.ConnectionFactory=tcp://localhost:61616?minLargeMessageSize=10240
--- End diff --

ahhh... I was looking for something in the readme for the 10K and missed 
that... 

and you believe I wrote this years ago...  :)


merging it!


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1642: NO-JIRA - minor updates to sample, so i...

2017-11-06 Thread pgfox

Github user pgfox commented on a diff in the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1642#discussion_r149115107
  
--- Diff: 
examples/features/standard/large-message/src/main/resources/jndi.properties ---
@@ -16,5 +16,5 @@
 # under the License.
 
 
java.naming.factory.initial=org.apache.activemq.artemis.jndi.ActiveMQInitialContextFactory
-connectionFactory.ConnectionFactory=tcp://localhost:61616

+connectionFactory.ConnectionFactory=tcp://localhost:61616?minLargeMessageSize=10240
--- End diff --

Thanks @clebertsuconic .

In the comments in LargeMessageExample.java it mentions the following.
``
// Step 3. Perform a lookup on the Connection Factory. This 
ConnectionFactory has a special attribute set on
// it.
// Messages with more than 10K are considered large

``
I think it is good to have a sample of how to set the config on the url to 
show syntax, in case a customer wants to change the default for whatever 
reason. 


---

Re: Twitter

2017-11-06 Thread Clebert Suconic

so, do we have consensus now? can we reactivate it?

On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Martyn Taylor  wrote:
> +1 from me
>
> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 12:43 AM, Christopher Shannon <
> christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think lazy concensus is ok.  As long as no one has any objections I would
>> think it's ok to move ahead with it under PMC control as Tim pointed out.
>> But Tim is right that should give it 72 hours for people to see the thread
>> and comment.
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 7:28 PM, Clebert Suconic > >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Do we a vote even for that? It seemed a no brainer.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 6:56 PM Michael André Pearce <
>> > michael.andre.pea...@me.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Should be deactivated now.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > On 1 Nov 2017, at 22:51, Michael André Pearce <
>> > > michael.andre.pea...@me.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > That would be my apologies on that i was setting up to make sure it
>> > > would work. I didn’t realise the ramifications I will disable it whilst
>> > we
>> > > await the time to elapse.
>> > > >
>> > > > Please accept my apologies
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Sent from my iPhone
>> > > >
>> > > >>> On 1 Nov 2017, at 22:49, Timothy Bish  wrote:
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> On 11/01/2017 06:40 PM, Michael André Pearce wrote:
>> > > >>> Agreed PMC ultimately will have overall control.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> This is why the mail before about the “owner” account to be the
>> PMC.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Problem being that there is now a "official" ActiveMQ twitter
>> account
>> > > that is not currently owned or controlled by the PMC that was created
>> > from
>> > > a discussion that did not give the standard 72 hours for discussion and
>> > > either consensus or lazy consensus to occur.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>> Sent from my iPhone
>> > > >>>
>> > > > On 1 Nov 2017, at 22:24, Timothy Bish 
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > On 11/01/2017 06:13 PM, Michael André Pearce wrote:
>> > > > Also a shout out for committers and pmc, if you want to be added
>> as
>> > > we set this up we will need your twitter handles (I have some peoples
>> but
>> > > not all)
>> > >  Ultimately the PMC needs to decide which committers would be given
>> > > access as per the Apache social media policy.
>> > > 
>> > > > Cheers
>> > > > Mike
>> > > >
>> > > > Sent from my iPhone
>> > > >
>> > > >> On 1 Nov 2017, at 22:11, Michael André Pearce <
>> > > michael.andre.pea...@me.com> wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I have sent a mail to the PMC. But in the interest of being
>> open,
>> > > will share on the Dev mail list also.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> We are slowly setting this up to check all would work etc etc.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> We have set the “owner” account to the private pmc mail address
>> as
>> > > per Apache guidelines, it seems there might be some filter on the
>> private
>> > > mail list as it seems the verify email from twitter is not received.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I have such asked for advice from the PMC.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Incase anyone has done this for other Apache projects and have
>> > some
>> > > advice how they handled this or get the verify email, it is welcome.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Cheers
>> > > >> Mike
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Sent from my iPhone
>> > > >>
>> > > >>> On 1 Nov 2017, at 16:34, Michael André Pearce <
>> > > michael.andre.pea...@me.com> wrote:
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Twitter for a group account has a nice level of owner, admin
>> and
>> > > user, that means committers can login with their own accounts and no
>> one
>> > > need the master/owners password for day to day, the owner account just
>> > > needed to reset bits if ever needed.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Owner = private pmc email (once we’ve setup all, this is easy
>> to
>> > > transfer)
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Sent from my iPhone
>> > > >>>
>> > >  On 1 Nov 2017, at 16:19, Michael André Pearce <
>> > > michael.andre.pea...@me.com> wrote:
>> > > 
>> > >  Yes, I would set it up sort it out then finally transfer the
>> > > owner to private mail list so pmc have control
>> > > 
>> > >  Sent from my iPhone
>> > > 
>> > > > On 1 Nov 2017, at 13:36, Timothy Bish 
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Any official project social media account needs to be under
>> > > control the project PMC, refer to
>> > > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/socialmedia
>> > > >
>> > > >> On 11/01/2017 09:22 AM, Christopher Shannon wrote:
>> > > >> +1
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Clebert Suconic <
>> > > clebert.suco...@gmail.com>
>> > > >> wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >>> +1
>> > >

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1642: NO-JIRA - minor updates to sample, so i...

2017-11-06 Thread clebertsuconic

Github user clebertsuconic commented on a diff in the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1642#discussion_r149106833
  
--- Diff: 
examples/features/standard/large-message/src/main/resources/jndi.properties ---
@@ -16,5 +16,5 @@
 # under the License.
 
 
java.naming.factory.initial=org.apache.activemq.artemis.jndi.ActiveMQInitialContextFactory
-connectionFactory.ConnectionFactory=tcp://localhost:61616

+connectionFactory.ConnectionFactory=tcp://localhost:61616?minLargeMessageSize=10240
--- End diff --

It was an oversight for sure.. nice catch...

Why you set minLargeMessagesize as 10K? the default is 100K.


---

[RESULT] [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.4.0

2017-11-06 Thread Justin Bertram

Results of the Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.4.0 release vote.

Vote passes with 3 +1 binding votes.

The following votes were received:

Binding:
+1 Timothy Bish
+1 Clebert Suconic
+1 Christopher Shannon

Non Binding:
+1 Justin Bertram
+1 Michael André Pearce

Thank you to everyone who contributed and took the time to review the
release candidates and vote.

I'll move forward with the getting the release out and updating the
relevant documentation.

Regards

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.4.0

2017-11-06 Thread Christopher Shannon

+1

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Michael André Pearce <
michael.andre.pea...@me.com> wrote:

> +1
>
> Have performed some standard load and latency tests on physical servers,
> no negative regressions seen in gathered metrics.
>
> Also performed some basic failover cases in ha setup.
>
> Have checked with both Artemis core and amqp client no new issues seen
> some historic resolved.
>
> Thanks Justin for the release :)
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On 3 Nov 2017, at 00:41, Clebert Suconic 
> wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Ran a few examples and tests. checked tags...
> >
> > Nice one Justin!
> >
> >> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 5:21 PM, Timothy Bish 
> wrote:
> >>> On 11/01/2017 02:53 AM, Justin Bertram wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.4.0 release.
> >>>
> >>> We had these new features and improvements added as part of 2.4.0:
> >>>
> >>> [ARTEMIS-534] - Allow JMX configuration from broker.xml
> >>> [ARTEMIS-1447] - JDBC NodeManager to support JDBC HA Shared Store
> >>> [ARTEMIS-1428] - Allow configuration of max frame payload length for
> STOMP
> >>> web-socket
> >>> [ARTEMIS-1463] - Implement rbac of management objects
> >>>
> >>> The release notes can be found here:
> >>>
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> version=12341540=12315920
> >>>
> >>> Source and binary distributions can be found here:
> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> >>> orgapacheactivemq-1153/org/apache/activemq/apache-artemis/2.4.0/
> >>>
> >>> The Maven repository is here:
> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapacheactivemq-1153
> >>>
> >>> In case you want to give it a try with the maven repo on examples:
> >>> http://activemq.apache.org/artemis/docs/latest/hacking-
> >>> guide/validating-releases.html
> >>>
> >>> The source tag:
> >>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=activemq-artemis.
> >>> git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/2.4.0
> >>>
> >>> I will update the website after the vote has passed.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> [ ] +1 approve the release as Apache Artemis 2.4.0
> >>> [ ] +0 no opinion
> >>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> >>>
> >>> Here's my +1
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Justin
> >>>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> * Validated signatures and checksums
> >> * checked for license and notice files in the archives
> >> * Created new broker instance from the binary package and ran it, check
> that
> >> web console worked
> >> * Ran some Qpid JMS client examples against the running broker
> >> * Built from source and ran some of the tests including the AMQP tests
> in
> >> the integration suite.
> >> * Checked using mvn apache-rat:check that no missing license headers
> were
> >> found.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Tim Bish
> >> twitter: @tabish121
> >> blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Clebert Suconic
>

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1628: ARTEMIS-1364: Enable internal sorting in Hawti...

2017-11-06 Thread mtaylor

Github user mtaylor commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1628
  
@RaiSaurabh Awesome.  Thanks.


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1628: ARTEMIS-1364: Enable internal sorting in Hawti...

2017-11-06 Thread RaiSaurabh

Github user RaiSaurabh commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1628
  
@mtaylor Ok. Thanks, I will start working on doing it in broker end. Will 
update once done.


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1628: ARTEMIS-1364: Enable internal sorting in Hawti...

2017-11-06 Thread mtaylor

Github user mtaylor commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1628
  
@RaiSaurabh I am not sure how it can work with paging.  Since the full list 
needs to be sorted before the pages are populated.  This solution will receive 
the first N (page size) unsorted elements from a collection, then sort them, 
meaning only the page results are sorted.  We should instead implement this on 
the broker so that sorting + paging works.


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1628: ARTEMIS-1364: Enable internal sorting in Hawti...

2017-11-06 Thread RaiSaurabh

Github user RaiSaurabh commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1628
  
@mtaylor @michaelandrepearce The current implementation we set the sort 
column and option in the filter and pass it along to the Artemis server for the 
operation. But looking at the code on the Artemis server I see that it only 
check for the Filter components and not sorting. No such functionality is 
written for sorting of columns. With the default sorting operation provided by 
the Angular grid, I am able to sort the response table even on paging. Should 
not we go ahead with this?  


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1644: ARTEMIS-1503 Added ng-grid plugin

2017-11-06 Thread stanlyDoge

GitHub user stanlyDoge opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1644

ARTEMIS-1503 Added ng-grid plugin

The ng-grid needs the following plugin to automatically resize a table to 
accomodate a varying number of rows.

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/stanlyDoge/activemq-artemis-1 ARTEMIS-1503

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1644.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1644


commit 5ac7bc4e4ad0e41d59e2e9b96ede306e8c07d76c
Author: Stanislav Knot 
Date:   2017-11-06T09:10:30Z

ARTEMIS-1503 Added ng-grid plugin




---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1628: ARTEMIS-1364: Enable internal sorting in Hawti...

2017-11-06 Thread mtaylor

Github user mtaylor commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1628
  
@RaiSaurabh @michaelandrepearce Since the results are paged, we need to 
sort on the broker side.  If it doesn't work already then that's a bug on the 
broker that needs addressing.


---

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1649: ARTEMIS-1507 ActiveMQConnectionTimedOut...

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1648: ARTEMIS-1506 Synchronization issue duri...

ActiveMQ C# implementation - Unable to write data to the transport connection: An existing connection

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1647: ARTEMIS-1365 Advisory consumers listed ...

Re: Twitter

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1646: NO-JIRA update release documentation

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1600: ARTEMIS-1471 Needs Bounds Checking on w...

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1645: ARTEMIS-1504 Update to QpidJMS 0.27.0 a...

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1645: ARTEMIS-1504 Update to QpidJMS 0.27.0 a...

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1642: NO-JIRA - minor updates to sample, so i...

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1642: NO-JIRA - minor updates to sample, so it works...

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1642: NO-JIRA - minor updates to sample, so i...

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1642: NO-JIRA - minor updates to sample, so i...

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1642: NO-JIRA - minor updates to sample, so i...

Re: Twitter

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1642: NO-JIRA - minor updates to sample, so i...

[RESULT] [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.4.0

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.4.0

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1628: ARTEMIS-1364: Enable internal sorting in Hawti...

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1628: ARTEMIS-1364: Enable internal sorting in Hawti...

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1628: ARTEMIS-1364: Enable internal sorting in Hawti...

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1628: ARTEMIS-1364: Enable internal sorting in Hawti...

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #1644: ARTEMIS-1503 Added ng-grid plugin

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #1628: ARTEMIS-1364: Enable internal sorting in Hawti...

24 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information