Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NMS AMQP 1.8.0 - RC2

+1 (non-binding) On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 12:53 PM Ragnar Paulson wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Kudos to Michael and Krzysztof for taking this on and completing it. I'm > happy to see it move forward. > > Ragnar > > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 11:18 AM Michael Pearce > wrote: > > > Hi All, > > >

Re: [VOTE[ Release Apache NMS AMQP 1.8.0

+1 non binding. Nice to see this, great work! Cheers, Duane On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 7:59 AM Krzysztof wrote: > +1 non binding > > Thanks, > Krzysztof > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 12:49 PM Michael Pearce > wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > I have put together a spin for a Apache NMS AMQP release,

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NMS 1.8.0 - Release Candidate 6

+1 (non-binding) I agree .NET standard 2.0 is a great step in the right direction. Thanks! Cheers, Duane On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 9:15 AM Ragnar Paulson wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Great to see the move to .NET standard 2.0. > > Ragnar Paulson > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 12:29 PM Michael

Re: Reword NMS for AMQPNetLite

aul...@gmail.com> wrote: > Greetings, > > A while ago (quite a long while ago) Duane Pauls and Christopher Morgan > suggested reworking the NMS.AMQP layer for AMQPnetLite. > > I have joined them in this effort, today I signed and forwarded a signed > ICLA to the secretary

Re: [DISCUSS] Rework NMS.AMQP

ok. Does that make sense? Thanks, Duane On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 3:54 PM, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 02/15/2018 11:57 AM, Duane Pauls wrote: > >> In particular, I think we are wondering whether it would be considered >> feasible to work towards an initi

Re: [DISCUSS] Rework NMS.AMQP

In particular, I think we are wondering whether it would be considered feasible to work towards an initial release with the VS2017 project and solution files. This would require those who want to build it to either use VS2017 to build, or to use the dotnet sdk tool, as is described in the

Re: [DISCUSS] Rework NMS.AMQP

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote: > > I think u still need to fill a contributors agreement Does anyone know if there is a practical difference between the individual CLA and the corporate CLA? Or do they both accomplish the same goal equally?

Re: [VOTE] Migrate the NMS Projects from SVN to Git

+1 (non-binding)

Re: [DISCUSS] Rework NMS.AMQP

In parallel with getting this proposal ready, we went ahead and created a github repo to get started: https://github.com/SolaceLabs/nms-amqp It's basically empty, but work has just kicked off in a fork: https://github.com/cjwmorgan-sol-sys/nms-amqp/ As this proposal would indicate, our intent is

Re: [DISCUSS] Move Apache.NMS project to Git

For the NMS AMQP rework, we've created a github repo as a starting point: https://github.com/SolaceLabs/nms-amqp It's rather empty at the moment, but the work has been kicked off in a fork: https://github.com/cjwmorgan-sol-sys/nms-amqp/ There isn't much there yet, but migrating to a git

Re: [DISCUSS] Rework NMS.AMQP

On Feb 17, 2017 10:26 PM, "John D. Ament" wrote: I'm just wondering, AMQPNETLITE is published on nuget. Does NMS need to import the source code from it, or can you rely on the nuget dependency? Right, Chris could confirm, but I think he is going to be creating an MS

Re: [DISCUSS] Rework NMS.AMQP

Thanks for the feedback. On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 5:45 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote: > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 5:03 PM Jim Gomes wrote: > > As you point out, the licensing seems to be compatible, but maybe a quick > > review from Apache legal might be

[DISCUSS] Rework NMS.AMQP

Hello, I'm relatively new to the ActiveMQ community, but I've been watching this list for the last little while and would like to propose some rework to the NMS.AMQP API. I'm interested in any feedback you folks may have. Thanks in advance! NMS.AMQP REWORK PROPOSAL Abstract A pure .NET