Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1590
The AMQP JMS mapping is in part around getting any different AMQP JMS
implementations behaving consistently with each other, it could as easily say
use amqp-value, or say use either
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1590#discussion_r145081692
--- Diff:
tests/integration-tests/src/test/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/tests/integration/amqp/JMSMessageTypesTest.java
---
@@ -158,11
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1590#discussion_r145071633
--- Diff:
tests/integration-tests/src/test/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/tests/integration/amqp/JMSMessageTypesTest.java
---
@@ -158,11
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1590
Using an AmqpValue section with Binary content is perfectly valid, and is
what some other clients can prefer to do by default. The use of AmqpValue vs
Data section shouldn't influence
GitHub user gemmellr opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1551
NO-JIRA: update release guide to use dist dev repo
Updates the release guide based on improvements discussion on the dev list
around use of new helper script at
https://dist.apache.org
GitHub user gemmellr opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1548
ARTEMIS-1434: update handling of tick deadline values
- account for potential to be negative due to using nanoTime derived values
- add some other edge case protections to avoid task
GitHub user gemmellr opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1545
ARTEMIS-1432: update to qpid-jms 0.25.0 and proton-j 0.22.0
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/gemmellr/activemq
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1518
@franz1981 I don't think its actually strictly doing that, though the code
it is calling can have that effect (see later), and the code calling the method
the above line is from
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1505
@franz1981 its size is bounded by the amount of oustanding credit the
consumer has, so its not going to grow much at all in the client context.
---
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1505
We use ArrayDeque in the Qpid JMS client, I think thats fine in its
client-only context.
---
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1337
Looks good to me, but would be better if folks with more of a clue about
the broker and its config etc gave things a look before they merge. @mtaylor,
@jbertram ?
---
If your project
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1337
@michaelandrepearce
> I assume you're happier with this approach then? can you confirm this?
Yep, I did comment around this yesterday but I put it on the JIRA as thats
wh
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1337#discussion_r121922296
--- Diff:
tests/integration-tests/src/test/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/tests/integration/amqp/AmqpClientTestSupport.java
---
@@ -74,6
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1337#discussion_r121921232
--- Diff:
artemis-protocols/artemis-amqp-protocol/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/protocol/amqp/proton/ProtonServerSenderContext.java
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1337#discussion_r121920556
--- Diff:
artemis-protocols/artemis-amqp-protocol/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/protocol/amqp/proton/ProtonServerSenderContext.java
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1337#discussion_r121737014
--- Diff:
artemis-protocols/artemis-amqp-protocol/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/protocol/amqp/proton/ProtonServerSenderContext.java
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1337#discussion_r121733233
--- Diff:
artemis-core-client/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/api/config/ActiveMQDefaultConfiguration.java
---
@@ -442,6 +442,8
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1337#discussion_r121737539
--- Diff:
tests/integration-tests/src/test/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/tests/integration/amqp/AmqpClientTestSupport.java
---
@@ -155,6
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1337#discussion_r121735447
--- Diff:
artemis-protocols/artemis-amqp-protocol/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/protocol/amqp/proton/ProtonServerSenderContext.java
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1337#discussion_r121733939
--- Diff:
artemis-protocols/artemis-amqp-protocol/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/protocol/amqp/client/AMQPClientConnectionFactory.java
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1337#discussion_r121734250
--- Diff:
artemis-protocols/artemis-amqp-protocol/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/protocol/amqp/proton/AMQPConnectionContext.java
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1316
I seem to be the only one that considers the direct collision of simple
'regular queue' names and 'no-Client shared subscription backing queue' names
to be an issue. If everyone else
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1316
Given that all the queues exist in the same ultimate namespace, there will
obviously always be potential for collisions unless 'regular queues' had some
name mangling applied too (which
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1316
The no-ClientID shared-subscription behaviour was indeed broken for AMQP
JMS clients. Fixing that issue requires ensuring the container-id is not
included in their backing queue name
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1321
I don't think Tim is saying its not valid so much as it is essentially just
a client test in this situation (and one of several that could exist), with the
brokers required AMQP
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1272
@michaelandrepearce ah, well there you go, I wasn't aware of that...I guess
some bits of netty I've not used needs those, or maybe they are actually shaded
in the split modules to begin
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1272
@michaelandrepearce Which is one reason I suggested having a specific
client distribution, which would give what the JIRA requested, without
involving maven. Shading can indeed have
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1272
Would an alternative be just offering a separate client binary convenient
download, rather than just the single all-inclusive archive? Or documenting a
maven command to gather all
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1214
Dependency changes really deserve a JIRA, like almost every code/behaviour
related change.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1158#discussion_r108979183
--- Diff:
artemis-protocols/artemis-amqp-protocol/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/protocol/amqp/proton/ProtonServerReceiverContext.java
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1158#discussion_r108929638
--- Diff:
artemis-protocols/artemis-amqp-protocol/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/protocol/amqp/proton/ProtonServerReceiverContext.java
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1140#discussion_r108422248
--- Diff:
artemis-protocols/artemis-amqp-protocol/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/protocol/amqp/proton/handler/ProtonHandler.java
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1140#discussion_r108396438
--- Diff:
artemis-protocols/artemis-amqp-protocol/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/protocol/amqp/proton/handler/ProtonHandler.java
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1140#discussion_r108398829
--- Diff:
artemis-protocols/artemis-amqp-protocol/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/protocol/amqp/proton/handler/ProtonHandler.java
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1138#discussion_r108394675
--- Diff:
artemis-cli/src/main/resources/org/apache/activemq/artemis/cli/commands/etc/amqp-acceptor.txt
---
@@ -1,3 +1,3
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1138#discussion_r108394942
--- Diff:
artemis-cli/src/main/resources/org/apache/activemq/artemis/cli/commands/etc/broker.xml
---
@@ -61,10 +61,13 @@
${ping
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/983
The new documentation seems a little confusing given all the mentions of
JMS, which is often only indirectly related to what the transformers are doing,
with cross-protocol conversion
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/915
Ideally a client would receive what it sends in most cases, though for the
header there is scope for change given its a mutable section. The durability
and priority wouldnt typically
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/833
Reverting the replacement of netty-codec-mqtt with netty-all (but keeping
the version change) might work, as the individual netty-foo modules do have
OSGi metadata, and that would
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/782#discussion_r79623050
--- Diff:
artemis-protocols/artemis-proton-plug/src/main/java/org/proton/plug/context/server/ProtonServerSessionContext.java
---
@@ -60,6 +61,9
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/690#discussion_r73343218
--- Diff:
artemis-protocols/artemis-amqp-protocol/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/core/protocol/proton/plug
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/690#discussion_r73322300
--- Diff:
artemis-protocols/artemis-amqp-protocol/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/core/protocol/proton/plug
Github user gemmellr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/637
I've got no idea about the change itself, but I noticed the 'NO-JIRA' flag.
I'd say this really should have a JIRA (as most things should), and in this
case it would be the same one used
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/390#discussion_r52922134
--- Diff:
artemis-protocols/artemis-proton-plug/src/main/java/org/proton/plug/context/AbstractConnectionContext.java
---
@@ -40,28 +44,32
Github user gemmellr commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/88#issuecomment-123631457
I'd suggest using the ConcurrentMap interface for the declarations rather
than using the ConcurrentHashMap type directly, otherwise you can introduce
GitHub user gemmellr opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/219
Upgrade to proton 0.9.1 and fix the build
#218 broke the build, needed a couple of fixes to the distribution module
to account for the reduced offset.
#217 upgraded the main
Github user gemmellr commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/219#issuecomment-98494023
I just rebased since @clebertsuconic fixed the build while I was running
the tests and typing my PR comments ;)
---
If your project is set up for it, you can
Github user gemmellr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-6/pull/186#discussion_r26487547
--- Diff: LICENSE ---
@@ -200,3 +200,37 @@
WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
See the License
Github user gemmellr closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-6/pull/175
---
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 feature
GitHub user gemmellr opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-6/pull/175
update command to build a distribution without having gitbook installed
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/gemmellr/activemq
GitHub user gemmellr opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-6/pull/176
ACTIVEMQ6-55: prevent NPE when closing a link with no context
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/gemmellr/activemq-6
101 - 151 of 151 matches
Mail list logo
