Re: Status version of 5.12.3 release

Hello Tim, Thank you for your answer Is it possible to add version 5.12.3 in the archive page please? Thanks in advance, Thibault -- View this message in context:

Re: [DISCUSS] ActiveMQ utility project name

I thought we could still release independently from a sub tree. As for he tools project what about having the exporter on amq code base and have it exporting the same format we use on Artemis importer? If you really need a bridge for what you think then we need the project as suggested. On

Re: [DISCUSS] ActiveMQ utility project name

I would echo Tim's comments, particularly around test client code. I'm in the middle of seperating things elsewhere that probably shouldn't have been lumped together initially. Beyond that, the first thing infra will likely tell folks to do is to use http://reporeq.apache.org for any new

Re: [DISCUSS] ActiveMQ utility project name

On 02/01/2017 09:09 AM, Clebert Suconic wrote: +1 Although, can we use the opportunity to go beyond the tools you are thinking now? I'd be careful of the amount of things lumped into one subproject especially if they are unrelated to the focus of that project as it drags down the ease of

Re: [DISCUSS] ActiveMQ utility project name

I was thinking about writing a similar utility. Artemis has an importer which will read an XML document that I think would be useful for this task. If the KahaDB can be exported to the proper XML format then the utility's work will be done. Unfortunately the XML format isn't specifically

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #983: ARTEMIS-936 - make amqp transformers configurab...

Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/983 @andytaylor these failures on the PR check seem real. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #982: ARTEMIS-922 implement purge semantics

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/982 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the

Re: [DISCUSS] ActiveMQ utility project name

+1 Although, can we use the opportunity to go beyond the tools you are thinking now? there are a couple of other things that would be nice to be shared as well. For instance some openwire parsers, some testsuite libraries for AMQP that we share with a copy & paste inheritance between artemis

Re: [DISCUSS] ActiveMQ utility project name

Agree to create a more generic repo as it could contain different modules in the future. Regards JB⁣​ On Feb 1, 2017, 13:45, at 13:45, Christopher Shannon wrote: >I'm going to ping infra to create a new project but wanted to get some >feedback from people

[DISCUSS] ActiveMQ utility project name

I'm going to ping infra to create a new project but wanted to get some feedback from people first. The main motivation for this utility project is to create some command line store utilities for things like migrating a KahaDB store to an Artemis store. I could request the name to be

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #983: ARTEMIS-936 - make amqp transformers con...

GitHub user andytaylor opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/983 ARTEMIS-936 - make amqp transformers configurable and default to native https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-936 You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #945: ARTEMIS-905 JCtools ConcurrentMap replacement

Github user franz1981 commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/945 @ig-michaelpearce No problem, I'll be more than happy to check it out and try to understand what could be happened; my personal email is on the GitHub profile --- If your project is

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #945: ARTEMIS-905 JCtools ConcurrentMap replacement

Github user ig-michaelpearce commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/945 @franz1981 we patched the 1.x branch locally and ran this, we saw some unexpected jitter compared with 1.5.1 release. could be other 1.x code changes since 1.5.1, unfortunately