+1
On 5/16/24 14:19, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I want to propose having all of our user lists including an
Unsubscribe-me link at the end of the messages. Such unsubscribe-me
should include the link with enough information to remove such
subscriptions. Something like:
Click here To unsubscribe
On 4/23/24 13:57, Justin Bertram wrote:
Following up from the previous discussion thread on this subject, I'd like
to propose a vote for archiving the following repos:
- activemq-stomp - https://github.com/apache/activemq-stomp
- activemq-activeio -
On 4/11/24 16:08, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi folks,
I submit Apache ActiveMQ "Classic" 6.1.2 release to your vote.
This release includes 8 fixes, especially:
- secure Jolokia and REST API by default
- fix on runtimeConfigurationPlugin JMX MBean reload operation
- fix when consuming empty
On 3/19/24 19:12, Justin Bertram wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.33.0 release.
Here are some noteworthy updates in 2.33.0:
- Support for JSON formatted typed properties on CLI producer command
- New CLI command pwd for showing directories related to the current
to create a repo, could someone from
the
PMC do this for me?
On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 at 09:27, Andy Taylor
wrote:
I will go ahead and request the new repo today
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 at 18:39, Timothy Bish
wrote:
On 3/18/24 13:33, Andy Taylor wrote:
so I am open to names, how about artemis-cons
On 3/18/24 13:33, Andy Taylor wrote:
so I am open to names, how about artemis-console-plugin v1.0.0
+1
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 at 17:24, Clebert Suconic
wrote:
+1 on activemq-artemis-console-plugin
As Robbie said, you will need different versions for it. I feel like
it would be easier to
+1 for the separate repo approach
On 3/14/24 09:10, Domenico Francesco Bruscino wrote:
+1 separate repo
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 at 14:07, Clebert Suconic
wrote:
+1 separate repo
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 7:12 AM Robbie Gemmell
wrote:
That it can actually be run standalone would be another
On 1/24/24 16:29, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.32.0 release.
I would like to highlight the following for this release:
* Mirrored Core Messages can now be sent in their native format
without conversions
* Mirror has been extensively tested and
cases the TCK doesn't
check.
Justin
On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 3:58 PM Timothy Bish wrote:
On 11/29/23 16:15, Justin Bertram wrote:
It's not clear to me that this is a defect. The JavaDoc for
JMSContext.acknowledge() [1] says (in part):
This method has identical behaviour to the acknowledge
On 11/29/23 16:15, Justin Bertram wrote:
It's not clear to me that this is a defect. The JavaDoc for
JMSContext.acknowledge() [1] says (in part):
This method has identical behaviour to the acknowledge method on Message.
A client may individually acknowledge each message as it is consumed, or
On 10/27/23 07:16, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Hi folks,
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.31.2 release.
This addresses a defect introduced in the recent 2.31.1 release.
The release notes can be found here:
On 10/26/23 06:12, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I'd like to move the artemis examples out of the main build+repo and
into a specific repo of their own.
There are a significant number of them, most of which rarely change,
and I think it would be nicer to have them sitting standalone. Having
them
On 10/25/23 16:33, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.31.1
This release contains bug fixes, improvements and component upgrades.
For a complete release refer to the JIRA release notes:
On 10/25/23 12:56, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 at 15:35, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi guys,
I submit Apache ActiveMQ 5.16.7 release to your vote.
We did a single improvement in this release:
- improvement on OpenWire marshaller on Throwable class type
Here's the Release
On 10/25/23 01:37, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi all,
I submit Apache ActiveMQ 5.18.3 release to your vote. This release is
a maintenance release on the 5.18.x series bringing:
- fix on destinations create when message is delayed
- fix on moving message to DLQ when produce via HTTP and TTL is
On 10/25/23 04:01, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi all,
I submit Apache ActiveMQ 5.17.6 release to your vote. This release is
a maintenance release on the 5.17.x series bringing:
- improvement on KahaDB memory consumption
- add additional fields on JMX Connection MBean
- improvement on OpenWire
On 9/15/23 15:40, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.31.0 release.
This is the 2nd Respin of the release (RC2)
This was a large release overall with many improvements, and I'm proud
of what we accomplished on this release. Thanks for all who
contributed
On 9/11/23 17:14, Christopher Shannon wrote:
First, I realize that this thread is likely to cause a fight based on past
history and probably not go anywhere, but with the work being done
with Jakarta for AMQ 5.x I think it's time to at least bring up the
ActiveMQ 6.0 discussion.
With all the
commit/3953b9aaefaee914bdd0702f27aef47c021ceb27
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 5:49 PM Arthur Naseef wrote:
Thank you Tim. That helps.
Art
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 2:23 PM Timothy Bish
wrote:
On 8/22/23 15:28, Arthur Naseef wrote:
I'd like to ask first to get some clarification.
Using the activemq-op
On 8/22/23 15:28, Arthur Naseef wrote:
I'd like to ask first to get some clarification.
Using the activemq-openwire project, I was able to get it to generate
openwire Java code, but that code did not exactly match the code in the
activemq codebase. It appeared to be mostly non-functional
On 8/22/23 15:21, Matt Pavlovich wrote:
Hi-
The activmeq-openwire project is currently hosted in a separate git repository.
The project is used to generate marshaller classes for multiple languages and
would be suitable for supporting multi-broker openwire support as well (5.x and
Artemis).
On 7/21/23 09:54, Justin Bertram wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.30.0 release.
This is mainly a bug-fix release with a few small improvements and a
handful of dependency upgrades.
The release notes can be found here:
On 6/28/23 01:44, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi,
I submit Apache ActiveMQ 5.18.2 release to your vote. This release is
a maintenance release on the 5.18.x series bringing:
- fix potential NPE when removing consumer with selector
- fix composite consumers in a NoB
- fix memory leak on the STOMP
On 6/28/23 09:40, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi guys,
I submit Apache ActiveMQ 5.17.5 release to your vote. This release is
a maintenance release on the 5.17.x series bringing:
- fix on stale queues when a connection is long to shutdown
- fix on KahaDB where the db files may be larger than the
On 6/14/23 19:39, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.29.0 release.
This is a representative workload with 126 JIRAs and 200+ commits with
a diverse number of committers. Thanks to all who contributed to this
big release.
The release notes can be found
On 4/11/23 05:26, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi,
I submit Apache ActiveMQ 5.18.1 release to your vote. This release
fixes activemq-client-jakarta where the META-INF/services file was
missing in the artifact.
You can take a look on the Release Notes for details:
On 3/19/23 13:26, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi,
After several weeks of work, I'm glad to submit ActiveMQ 5.18.0 to
your vote. This release is a major milestone for ActiveMQ bringing
major changes:
- JMS 2 API support (client)
- support Jakarta namespace (client)
- a lot of dependency updates
On 2/22/23 03:06, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi,
I submit ActiveMQ 5.17.4 to your vote. This release includes several
fixes, improvements and a lot of dependency updates, especially:
- add JOLOKIA_CONF env variable in wrapper configuration
- potential race condition in the store while creating
On 2/4/23 12:54, Havret wrote:
Hi all,
I have put together a release of activemq-nms-openwire, please check it
and vote accordingly. Huge thanks to Łukasz Cygan for his help in resolving
the issue identified in version 2.0.0.
This release contains the following change:
On 1/31/23 10:18, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.28.0 release.
I would like to highlight the following changes in this release:
- Page counting improved. We no longer store counters in the journal
simply relying on paging itself for that
- We
On 11/29/22 10:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi all,
I submit the ActiveMQ 5.17.3 release to your vote.
This release includes 32 fixes and improvements, especially:
- Fix ActiveMQ Console on Karaf 4.4.x
- Fix Jolokia startup on Windows platform
- Upgrade to Spring 5.3.23
- Upgrade to Jackson
On 11/28/22 16:54, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.27.1 release
This is a bug fix release,
I would like to highlight these 3 bug fixes:
- AMQP Large Message over Bridges were broken
- Rollback of massive transactions would take a long time to
On 11/8/22 21:33, Justin Bertram wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.27.0 release.
New and noteworthy items in 2.27.0:
- Fix for CVE-2022-42889 (Apache Commons Text vulnerability)
- Logging implementation moved to Apache Log4j 2 (internally using SLF4J)
- New
On 9/21/22 16:23, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.26.0 release.
We removed ActiveMQ Artemis Rest, (which was already non functional)
as part of this release.
And other improvements and bug fixes.
The release notes can be found here:
On 8/31/22 12:28, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.25.0 release.
This JIRA improved flow control from paging preventing Out Of Memory
issues when there's a bad consumer without flow control (ARTEMIS-3943
(Thank you Anton Roskvist)).
Among other fixes
On 7/26/22 14:30, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.24.0 release
There are two features added as part of this release:
- Paging does not use soft cache any longer. As a matter of fact we
don't have any caching now.. we just read from files straight to
+1
Removing them seems valid given the issues noted.
On 7/26/22 12:18, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I think removing them would be good for various reasons inc all you noted below.
On Tue, 26 Jul 2022 at 14:34, Clebert Suconic wrote:
We currently deploy these following shaded uber jars with
On 7/12/22 15:49, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an ActiveMQ Artemis Native 2.0.0 release
For those who are not familiar, this is the Native Layer in Artemis
responsible for the integration on Linux and Libaio.
I have been working on some logging changes with Robbie Gemmel,
On 6/14/22 16:58, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.23.1 release
This is a small release following up where I added a fix for the following bug:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-3856 - Failed to change
channel state to ReadyForWriting :
On 6/7/22 15:05, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.23.0 release.
As part of this release I would like to highlight the addition of
Jakarta 10 to the supported APIs.
The release notes can be found here:
On 5/6/22 02:26, Tetreault, Lucas wrote:
[ ] Primary/Backup
[+1] Primary/Backup
--
Tim Bish
On 4/29/22 16:36, Clebert Suconic wrote:
For a while, I thought it would be nice to remove jboss-logging from
artemis and use a generic logger. (SLF4J, Log4j, commons.. whatever..
it's all orthogonal and transparent to this discussion, we can decide
that at a later point).
One of the issues we
On 4/29/22 05:01, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi guys,
I submit the ActiveMQ 5.16.5 release to your vote.
This release is a maintenance release on the 5.16.x series including:
- fix on configuration when wrapper is used
- fix memory lead on temp store
- avoid potential NPE when starting
On 4/28/22 12:24, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.22.0 release.
There are no new features on this release, however there are many
improvements and bug fixes.
In particular there's a default change on cluster connections where we
now use 1MB bytes
On 4/25/22 13:40, Havret wrote:
Hi all,
I have put together a release of activemq-nms-api, please check it and vote
accordingly.
This release contains a single bugfix[1] by Iuliia Fatkullina! Thank you!
The files can be grabbed from:
On 4/25/22 10:21, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi guys,
I submit the ActiveMQ 5.17.1 release to your vote.
This release is an important release on the 5.17.x series, bringing
major changes:
- upgrade to Spring 5.3.19, fixing Spring4shell vulnerability (even if
ActiveMQ is not directly impacted)
+1 from me
On 4/6/22 16:12, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Sounds good to me.
On Wed, 6 Apr 2022, 20:34 Christopher Shannon, <
christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote:
Another one I noticed that can probably be closed is:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BLAZE
On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 3:19 PM
On 4/4/22 13:12, Havret wrote:
Sure, do you have the link to the previous ticket so I can clone it?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21495
Thanks,
Havret
On Mon, Apr 4, 2022 at 5:19 PM Robbie Gemmell
wrote:
About a year ago we requested that Infra rename the default branches
On 3/22/22 17:32, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.21.0 release.
We added these new features as part of 2.21.0:
[ARTEMIS-3522] - Implement performance tools to evaluate throughput
and Response Under Load performance of Artemis
[ARTEMIS-3638] - MQTT 5
+1
* Validated signatures and checksums
* Verified license and notice files in archives
* Checked source for license headers using apache-rat
* Built from source and ran a sampling of the tests
* Spun of the broker from the binary archive and tested some with the
Web Console
On 3/10/22
+1 from me, the JMS 2.0 stuff can bake a bit longer and be in the next
release
On 2/22/22 09:23, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
It is very much OK with me.
(You'll most often see me moaning about not releasing enough, and
putting too much in single releases, rather than the reverse).
On Tue, 22 Feb
On 2/21/22 08:12, Christopher Shannon wrote:
+1 to go with 5.17.0 without JMS 2.0
I think we should just wait for all the JMS 2.0 stuff for 5.18.0. We
shouldn't even include the new dependency as it would be kind of confusing
as it wouldn't implement anything. We can easily document that if
On 2/11/22 13:47, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi all,
I submit Apache ActiveMQ 5.16.4 release to your vote (take #3).
This release includes important fixes and updates on the 5.16.x
series, especially:
- log4j 1.x has been replaced by reload4j including the latest security fixes
- fix OSGi
On 1/26/22 15:08, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.19.1 release.
This is a maintenance release on top of 2.19.0 that includes a few bug fixes.
The release notes can be found here:
On 12/15/21 12:22 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.20.0 release...
There is a few improvements and bug fixes on this release, there's one
feature added:
[ARTEMIS-2097] - Pause and Block Producers
This is also the first release where we are
On 12/14/21 3:05 PM, Justin Bertram wrote:
Yes, I think the same. As already noted, ActiveMQ 5.8.0 doesn't use any
version of the vulnerable library (i.e. Log4j2 <=2.14.1).
It's also worth noting that ActiveMQ 5.x uses slf4j as the primary
logging facade so if you don't like the default log4j
On 10/11/21 10:13 PM, Justin Bertram wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.19.0 release.
We added these new features as part of 2.19.0:
- New ability to replay retained journal records via the management API.
- New environment/system property to set the "key" for masked
On 10/13/21 7:06 AM, Gary Tully wrote:
the check sum seems wrong:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/activemq/activemq-artemis/2.19.0/apache-artemis-2.19.0-bin.tar.gz.sha512
can someone else verify?
I get:
On 9/29/21 9:50 AM, Michael André Pearce wrote:
+1 from myself, run some basic tests and against artemis
Thanks for running the release, and to the contributors for this.
copying in PMC private list to get attention of the PMC.
On 21 Sep 2021, at 21:14, Havret wrote:
Hi All,
I have put
the package did make it to nuget
8 days ago though.
On Mon, 16 Aug 2021 at 10:49, Havret wrote:
Results of the activemq-nms-amqp 1.8.2-rc3 release vote.
Vote passes with 4 votes.
The following votes were received:
Binding:
- Michael André Pearce
- Clebert Suconic
- Timothy Bish,
- Jeff Genender
On 6/27/21 4:49 PM, Havret wrote:
Hi,
This is the second run for activemq-nms-amqp 1.8.2.
I've added the missing headers, updated the license files, and generated
SHA512 using powershell not gpg, so it should be more in line with what you
guys are used to.
The files can be grabbed from:
On 5/19/21 6:17 AM, Christopher Shannon wrote:
Moving back to dev list again...
Yes we had talked about it before in terms of the client side but it wasn't
clear in this thread as your original answer on this thread was "ActiveMQ
5.17.0 will support JMS 2.0." with no caveats or clarification to
On 4/27/21 1:32 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofre wrote:
Hi,
Gently reminder, we need a third binding vote.
Regards
JB
Le 21 avr. 2021 à 09:49, Jean-Baptiste Onofre a écrit :
Hi everyone,
I submit Apache ActiveMQ 5.16.2 to your vote.
This release includes important fixes and updates on the 5.16.x
Did I miss the announcement going out? Seems like it should have been done
by now but I don't see it, although website appears to but updated now.
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 8:44 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre
wrote:
> Thanks Robbie,
>
> I was about to update website. Thanks for catching this !
>
> I
On 1/12/21 11:35 AM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose requiring JDK 11 as a minimal requirement on
ActiveMQ Artemis on master, to be released as 2.17
+1
JDK 8 is about end of life, and that would open up better
possibilities on what we write in Artemis. JDK 8 is pretty old at
On 12/17/20 4:01 PM, Matt Pavlovich wrote:
Aleksander-
I think a C-library and a C++ wrapper would have a lot of value, and open the
ability to have some nice CLI tools for linux admins, container images, etc.
Something like ‘amq send | recv | browse | MY.QUEUE”
I agree, I think staying with
On 11/2/20 8:44 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.16.0 release.
This release is including these new features as part of 2.16.0:
[ARTEMIS-2901] - Support namespace for temporary queues
[ARTEMIS-2937] - AMQP Server Connectivity
[ARTEMIS-2947] -
On 8/25/20 2:48 PM, Domenico Francesco Bruscino wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.15.0 release.
We added these new features as part of 2.15.0:
[ARTEMIS-2847] - socks5h support
[ARTEMIS-2855] - Define a new broker plugin to track XA transactions
[ARTEMIS-2857] - Expose
I've attempted to migrate the old CI jobs that were actually running.
The SNAPSHOT deploy jobs seemed to have worked and the other test run
jobs are running with failing tests as before. I'd recommend folks
check the projects they are concerned about and see if other jobs are
needed and / or
I requested a folder be created for ActiveMQ and they've finally gotten
round to it
https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/ActiveMQ/
Can now start to migrate jobs to the new CI
On 7/24/20 8:32 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I haven't seen this mail discussed, or any jobs migrated onto the new
Jenkins
On 7/22/20 2:36 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Following on from an earlier thread around Jekyll versions and build
issues etc, I have just gone through the hoops with infra and put an
automated website build in place for a trial and discussion. Folks can
now give it a try out and we could decide if
On 7/25/20 2:24 PM, Matt Pavlovich wrote:
Kicking off draft proposal conversation, we can then convert this to a ticket.
I’ve collected ideas from the recent dev mailing list convo. I’m sure I’ve
missed some key points and am not married to anything here. Please chime in!
Description: Support
On 7/21/20 1:03 PM, Gary Tully wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I have a candidate for vote.
This has support for migrating virtual topic consumer queues to durable
subscription queues as part of kahadb export.
doc: https://github.com/apache/activemq-cli-tools
The list of resolved issues is here:
On 7/15/20 3:48 PM, Christopher Shannon wrote:
Actually this may be easier than I thought. I forgot that OpenWire doesn’t
include property names so we might be able to get away with just renaming
things and everything would work fine and be compatible as long as
properties are in the same order.
On 7/10/20 9:26 AM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.14.0 release.
We only added one feature as part of this release:
[ARTEMIS-2770] - Update diverts using the management API
And we have quite a few improvements on this release:
[ARTEMIS-2109] -
On 6/15/20 11:19 AM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis Native 1.0.2 release.
Artemis native is a dependency for Artemis responsible for the journal
type libaio. It's basically a JNI wrapper submitting writes to the
kernel on Linux.
I have already
On 6/15/20 11:19 AM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis Native 1.0.2 release.
Artemis native is a dependency for Artemis responsible for the journal
type libaio. It's basically a JNI wrapper submitting writes to the
kernel on Linux.
I have already
On 5/25/20 7:42 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofre wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm submitting ActiveMQ 5.15.13 release to your vote.
This release includes several bug fixes and improvements.
Please take a look on the Release Notes for details:
+1
* Validated signatures and checksums
* Verified license and notice files in the archives
* Checked source for license headers using Apache Rat plugin
* Built from source and ran the AMQP tests
* Ran the Qpid JMS example against the binary broker archive instance.
* Ran some AMQP performance
at 8:16 PM Timothy Bish wrote:
On 5/11/20 1:33 PM, Krzysztof wrote:
@Robbie
I'm not sure what you mean by exactly-once. If you mentioned it in terms
of
delivery semantics, then nope, I'm not sure that would be enough.
Exactly-once is just a pipe dream, isn't it? Even if broker sends this
ack
ttps://github.com/Azure/amqpnetlite/issues/367#issuecomment-517421722
On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 5:46 PM Timothy Bish
wrote:
On 5/10/20 11:34 AM, Krzysztof wrote:
Hi,
I am working on the implementation of AcceptAsync for AmqpNetLite
but I
wasn't able to make Artemis issue any respon
of how the exchange of dispositions might occur based on the
type of delivery semantics.
For more context -->
https://github.com/Azure/amqpnetlite/issues/367#issuecomment-517421722
On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 5:46 PM Timothy Bish wrote:
On 5/10/20 11:34 AM, Krzysztof wrote:
Hi,
I am workin
On 5/10/20 11:34 AM, Krzysztof wrote:
Hi,
I am working on the implementation of AcceptAsync for AmqpNetLite but I
wasn't able to make Artemis issue any response to disposition frame with
the accepted state. Is this actually a supported feature? Maybe I am
missing sth.
Best,
Krzysztof
What
+1
* Checked archives for license and notice files
* Verified signatures and checksums
* Checked source license headers 'mvn apache-rat:check -P release'
* Ran the broker from the binary release archive and checked admin
console and ran Qpid JMS examples against it
* Ran the AMQP integration
On 4/9/20 4:25 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I just did
mvn install -Prelease
and it completed fine, without any issues. Even running the basic tests.
if you know anything wrong, please let me know before monday? as I
tried here and everything seems ok. I think Domenico also did build on
his
I'd recommend looking into the failures documented in this issue as they
seem to indicate regressions in the AMQP protocol handler stack as
compared to the previous release which doesn't seem to reproduce these
from testing myself and Robbie have done.
Please direct support questions to the ActiveMQ Users mailing list as
this list if for discussion of development of the broker itself.
On 3/28/20 5:17 AM, vedion wrote:
Hi,
I have a ActiveMQ where I have setup Redelivery on the client side. With a
simple consumer it works as expected with
.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 12:21 PM Timothy Bish wrote:
On 3/19/20 9:43 AM, nigro_franz wrote:
HI folks,
I'm thinking how to improve (the performance and stability) of AMQP paging
and I've fallen into this behaviour for paging AMQ standard messages:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis
On 3/19/20 9:43 AM, nigro_franz wrote:
HI folks,
I'm thinking how to improve (the performance and stability) of AMQP paging
and I've fallen into this behaviour for paging AMQ standard messages:
On 3/13/20 9:43 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofre wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm submitting ActiveMQ 5.15.12 release to your vote (take #2). In this new
round, we fixed JDBC lock test and STOMP connection error handling.
As for the previous attempt, this release includes dependency updates
(especially for
On 1/28/20 2:22 PM, Christopher Shannon wrote:
We definitely do not want to remove JDK 8 support for 5.16.0 so my vote is
for option 1. I think it's fine if we build with JDK 8 as long as it
supports JDK 8 - 11 at runtime.
For 5.17.0 we can work on building with JDK 11. For one thing I think
Please direct support questions to the users mailing list, this list is
for discussion of development of the ActiveMQ project and not meant for
user support questions.
On 11/4/19 11:32 AM, adongare wrote:
Hi team,
Getting error "the client and server cannot communicate, because they do not
On 10/31/19 6:02 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi guys,
As I'm working on 5.16.0 release preparation, it's important to agree
about the minimum Java version for runtime of this version.
The purpose is to fully support JDK 9+ (and so 11, 12, 13).
I started some upgrade to fully support those
+1
* Validated signatures and checksums
* Checked the license and notice files
* Compiled using both the native and docker build scripts
* Ran the maven build and tests
On 10/23/19 3:35 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
Ping @Everybody... I need votes here..
Vote for me!
I intend to put this
On 10/9/19 2:18 PM, wazburrows wrote:
Hi dev team,
I'm posting this to the dev mailing list because I see a lot activity on the
dev list around the recent Active MQ and Artemis releases here and was
hoping to get direction from the dev team. My question to you is where is
the best place for
-1 (binding)
On 10/3/19 3:30 PM, Krzysztof wrote:
Hi Robbie,
Ad 1: Could you elaborate a little about this? I've just downloaded all the
bits to my home machine, unpacked it, and removed successfully.
I've downloaded the binaries and can confirm that on a linux machine the
src archive
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 5:18 PM Clebert Suconic
wrote:
Results of the Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.10.1 release vote:
Vote passes with 10 +1 votes (6 bindings, 4 non bindings)
Binding:
Clebert Suconic
Timothy Bish
Gary Tully
Cristopher Shannon
Justin Bertram
Michael Andre Pearce
Non Binding
On 9/23/19 4:26 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.10.1 Release.
The release contains bug fixes and improvements as you can see on the
release report:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12315920=12346078
The commit
Is there some hurdle that is holding up the process? Seems like we should
have an announce thread by now and the site should be updated.
On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 1:27 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It's on the way, I'm preparing the website update. Chris helped me to
> finalize the
It would appear that this problem has occurred again. The past releases
page was partially updated but in all cases the updates were incorrect and
now the download links are broken. The links to the all broker release
archives themselves point to Apache Archives but the action=download bit at
1 - 100 of 6296 matches
Mail list logo
