Sending again, this time remembering to hit reply-all to keep both lists as
recipients...
On 13 May 2014 17:59, Justin Ross jr...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
My only comment around the actual names is that 'process' doesnt
On 13 May 2014 20:04, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/13/2014 05:12 PM, Chuck Rolke wrote:
I like having registered properties especially for common cases.
'client-pid' and 'client-name' would be my first vote.
The reason I don't like 'client' in there is that its not always
Sounds like a good idea to me. I have been meaning to do the same thing
with some other properties like 'version' and 'product'.
My only comment around the actual names is that 'process' doesnt
immediately make me think 'name' and even seems a little like it could be
describing the same thing as
On 14 May 2014 17:54, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/14/2014 10:23 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
My interest is mostly around conveying the main component being doing the
messaging (e.g. Qpid Messaging C++ Client, ActiveMQ Broker) rather than
the
application, but I can see that could
On 14 May 2014 21:48, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
On 14 May 2014 02:23, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
Now that Gordons email has arrived for me, I'll reply to the rest of it
:)
On 13 May 2014 17:31, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/13/2014 04
Now that Gordons email has arrived for me, I'll reply to the rest of it :)
On 13 May 2014 17:31, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/13/2014 04:47 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Sounds like a good idea to me. I have been meaning to do the same thing
with some other properties like 'version
On 12 November 2014 16:21, Clebert Suconic clebert.suco...@gmail.com
wrote:
I would like us to use the pull request approach on
github.com/apache/activemq-6.
To me that's a no brainer... PR commits is the best approach... simpler to
handle, review.. and you could even get tests working to
On 12 November 2014 16:55, Clebert Suconic clebert.suco...@gmail.com
wrote:
In the past this has been ruled out, committers can request addition to
the
'Apache' organization on github that the mirrors live under, but only
infra
team members have the necessary rights to update anything
Hi all,
I figured I would ask on the list about this one rather than raise a
JIRA, potential user error :D
When reading the docs I saw mention of being able to define core
queues in activemq-configuration.xml, or 'JMS queues' via
activemq-jms.xml. I have got the latter working fine, but was
of
defining JMS queue myQueue?
(Mainly trying to establish what AMQP addresses will or will not work
in future when the broker supports auto-creation of destinations)
Thanks,
Robbie
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi all,
I figured I would ask
Hi everyone (please use reply-all to keep both lists on the trail),
I would like to have a discussion around JMS destination handling in
the JMS Mapping for AMQP 1.0, in particular around how to handle JMS
Destination names via the AMQP address field of a link
(producer/consumer) source/target
On 17 December 2014 at 13:43, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 December 2014 at 13:37, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi everyone (please use reply-all to keep both lists on the trail),
I would like to have a discussion around JMS destination handling
On 17 December 2014 at 16:46, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 December 2014 at 17:25, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 17 December 2014 at 15:00, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 December 2014 at 15:45, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
On 17 December 2014 at 17:59, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 December 2014 at 18:37, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 17 December 2014 at 16:46, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 December 2014 at 17:25, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
On 18 December 2014 at 12:29, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/17/2014 12:37 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Hi everyone (please use reply-all to keep both lists on the trail),
I would like to have a discussion around JMS destination handling in
the JMS Mapping for AMQP 1.0, in particular
On 18 December 2014 at 15:10, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/18/2014 01:46 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
On 18 December 2014 at 12:29, Gordon Sim g...@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/17/2014 12:37 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Hi everyone (please use reply-all to keep both lists on the trail
+1 (non-binding)
I gave a kick of the tyres to the broker binaries on linux, verified
the checksums+sigs, built the source release skipping the tests, did a
'quick' subset of the tests (Client, Broker, Stomp, MQTT, JDBC,
LevelDB, AMQP), and verified a dependent project using the build
output.
+1 (non-binding)
I gave a kick of the tyres to the broker binary, built the source
release and successfully ran a 'quick' subset of the tests (Client,
Broker, AMQP, MQTT, LevelDB, Stomp with the below patch).
I'd expect most users to grab binaries than build the source or run
the tests. and as
+1 for the rename.
Using master is typical and this is definitely a change now made by
infra during migrations, based on experience of migrating a couple of
things into Git repos at Qpid recently.
On 5 January 2015 at 18:27, Hadrian Zbarcea hzbar...@gmail.com wrote:
It's a bit confusing, a
+1 (non-binding)
I tested out the src+bin tar.gz archives as follows:
- Checked the license/notice files were present and look ok.
- Verified the sigs using key from
https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/martyntaylor.asc
- Checked the deps in the binary tar look good license wise.
- Built the
of explicit
policy.
What is an apache release may indeed, in the future, extend to what is
in maven, and we will be ahead of the curve with the inclusion of
these two files :-)
[1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#where-do-releases-go
On 13 March 2015 at 16:15, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm
I downloaded the src+bin tar.gz files, and gave the src build a run
through and kicked the tyres on the binary. The NPE from RC1 when
using an AMQP client is now fixed. In the docs the links to the
configuration index now work, and the table there now links to the
.html files rather than the .md
at the licenses.. thanks again!
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Robbie Gemmell
robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
I downloaded the src+bin tar.gz files, and gave the src build a run
through and kicked the tyres on the binary. The NPE from RC1 when
using an AMQP client is now fixed. In the docs
On 13 March 2015 at 15:59, Martyn Taylor mtay...@redhat.com wrote:
On 13/03/15 15:16, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
I downloaded the src+bin tar.gz files, and gave the src build a run
through and kicked the tyres on the binary. The NPE from RC1 when
using an AMQP client is now fixed. In the docs
I tried out the source and binary tar.gz archives a little.
The source release (which is the one that really counts) has no
LICENSE file, and the NOTICE file contains the ASLv2 text which should
be in LICENSE but lacks the text required for NOTICE. See
On 26 February 2015 at 17:37, Timothy Bish tabish...@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/26/2015 12:30 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Hi all,
I was wondering what people thought about asking for the svngit2jira
integration[1] being turned on for the ActiveMQ repo/JIRA? I find it
very useful to know what work
Hi all,
I was wondering what people thought about asking for the svngit2jira
integration[1] being turned on for the ActiveMQ repo/JIRA? I find it
very useful to know what work if any has ben done against a JIRA so
far, and it can make tracking things down later much nicer.
For those that dont
)
Regards
--
Dejan Bosanac
--
Red Hat, Inc.
dbosa...@redhat.com
Twitter: @dejanb
Blog: http://sensatic.net
ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Robbie Gemmell
robbie.gemm...@gmail.com
wrote:
+1 for the rename.
Using master
On 13 May 2015 at 18:12, Martyn Taylor mtay...@redhat.com wrote:
Hello all.
I've cut a second release candidate of Apache Artemis 1.0.0 addressing the
initial RC feedback from community members.
This is a first release of the Artemis project with protocol support for
AMQP, STOMP, CORE,
Do you mean the -Xdoclint:none option? Javadoc is stricter with Java8
and will refuse to process things that 'worked' with Java7. You can
make it lenient again using the -Xdoclint config option, but that only
works when using Java8 and so setting it then makes javadoc processing
fail when building
Yes thats what I do on all .java files, I'm not actually sure why we
would put the header as a Javadoc. We dont particularly want it to
show up visibly on the resulting documentation (and it isnt strictly
required on generated files, only their source), and there isnt
anything in there which we
:16, Clebert Suconic clebert.suco...@gmail.com wrote:
too late :)
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Robbie Gemmell
robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
Err, I'd maybe hold up until tomorrow and give other folks a chance to
chime in, the below was only one persons opinion hehe.
When I say 'now' vs
As the JIRA project has just been renamed today and no release has
occurred yet, I think now would probably be the best time to ever
recreate the mirror.
I dont think the pull requests numbers beginning again is that big an
issue. The comments are available on the dev list as you said, and
also
Infra have updated the 3 repos/mirrors so they now say ActiveMQ Artemis.
Robbie
On 22 May 2015 at 09:20, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
The GitHub mirror has been recreated, and now correctly says it is
mirroring from the git://git.apache.org/activemq-artemis.git asf
mirror
+1 (non-binding)
I tested out the src+bin tar.gz archives:
- Verified the sigs
- Checked that the license/notice files are present and look ok.
- Built the src archive, ran the tests from the fast-tests profile.
- Followed the README in the binary archive to configure and start the broker.
-
rather new to Apache and the open source community, so I’m
a little confused.
When you say “Infra”, what exactly are you referring to? Is this a part of
the Apache team?
Thanks
On May 22, 2015, at 7:52 AM, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
Infra have updated the 3 repos/mirrors
Yeah I think 1.1.0 fits better too, both for whats actually in it now
and also for a future approach like Claus mentioned.
Robbie
On 13 August 2015 at 08:53, Claus Ibsen claus.ib...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
I think 1.1.0 is better.
Maybe here in the start where more new functions is added /
Hi folks,
The Unix Shell Script page
(http://activemq.apache.org/unix-shell-script.html) seems to be
driving the website Buildbot a bit nuts. It commits an update for this
page every hour and mails the commits@ list.
It looks like the Table of Contents could be the issue. It seems to be
changing
can i find it?
Regards
Marc
Am 29.07.2015 um 18:12 schrieb Robbie Gemmell:
Hi folks,
The Unix Shell Script page
(http://activemq.apache.org/unix-shell-script.html) seems to be
driving the website Buildbot a bit nuts. It commits an update for this
page every hour and mails the commits
to have fixed it. It
SHOULD just be rendering the pages that have changed.
Dan
On Aug 3, 2015, at 5:45 AM, Robbie Gemmell robbie.gemm...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know what the current export process used is or where it is
running exactly, other than the commit emails giving away
On 10 August 2015 at 19:11, Timothy Bish tabish...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi folks,
I've just cut a release candidate for the ActiveMQ 5.12.0 release and
it's ready for a vote. This release has 180+ bug fixes and
improvements. A large amount of work has gone into hardening the AMQP
and MQTT
On 4 August 2015 at 12:56, Christopher Shannon
christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com wrote:
So in general I'm not too picky with coding styles but I just started
looking at the Artemis project a few days ago and something that stood out
to me right away was the use of opening curly braces on a new
I haven't yet had an oportunity to test the artifacts, but I'll vote
once I have.
I'm not sure I see that the release is being rushed really. 5.12 has
been 'coming soon' for a reasonable while now, and folks have
mentioned that on both the lists recently. Tim and Dan both sent out a
headsup mails
On 15 July 2015 at 20:51, plsph gf...@wp.pl wrote:
it was typo during rewrite. broker settings are fine. i don't know what the
consumer is. i only got producer and broker.
it's hard to argue with statement that it should work. i've used qpid-proton
writen in c and i was able to send messages
You dont actually seem to be calling setContentObject at all in the
snippet below, but look to be constructing it with it. Did you try
setting the content using setContentObject instead?
My take from reading previous posts on the subject (such as the one
linked previously, by the person who wrote
On 14 July 2015 at 13:52, plsph gf...@wp.pl wrote:
it still gives BytesMessage
probably, the problem is with:
If the transformer is set to 'jms', the they type of JMS message will depend
on the body type of the AMQP message.
Body Type JMS Message Type
null
On 22 October 2015 at 17:21, mbroadst wrote:
> Hi Tim,
> Okay, I'm going by section 2.4.5 of the spec here where it indicates: "At
> connection open each peer communicates the maximum period between activity
> (frames) on the connection that it desires from its partner." Then
On 12 October 2015 at 19:33, Christopher Shannon
wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I have cut the ActiveMQ 5.12.1 release and it's ready for a vote. This
> release has 22 bug fixes and
> improvements.
>
> The list of resolved issues is here:
>
On 7 July 2015 at 18:33, Timothy Bish tabish...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey, awhile back Robbie brought this up on the dev list but it didn't
get much attention so I thought I'd bring it up and see if anyone had
any issues with us asking infra to enable the svngit2jira bit on our
various repos? If
On 9 July 2015 at 14:23, Timothy Bish tabish...@gmail.com wrote:
On 07/09/2015 04:40 AM, plsph wrote:
hi
when sending message by qpid proton writen in c, by default the message is
text message and i can recieve it with amqp broker in jms format, but when i
try to send message by qpid-cpp
..and to include the correct dev@ list... ;)
On 31 August 2015 at 13:40, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There were 4 binding +1 votes, and no other votes received. The vote has
> passed.
>
> I will add the archives to the dist release repo and release the ma
I'm not currently fixed to build/try the bits and my vote is
non-binding anyway (seems you now have the requried number though),
but I gave the artifacts a quick look at.
I checked they had licence+notice files and the sigs verified, which
they did, though the Apache.NMS-1.7.1-bin.src.asc sig
On 30 November 2015 at 14:22, Christopher Shannon
wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I have cut the ActiveMQ 5.13.0 release and it's ready for a vote. This
> release has over 80 bug fixes and new features.
>
> The list of resolved issues is here:
>
On 16 December 2015 at 15:48, Christopher Shannon
wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> The problem with the previous release attempt has been fixed I have
> re-created the ActiveMQ 5.12.2 release and it's ready for a vote. This
> release has 20 bug fixes and
>
On 5 January 2016 at 16:18, Christopher Shannon
wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> The problem with AMQ-6094 has been fixed I have re-created the ActiveMQ
> 5.12.2 release and it's ready for a vote. This release has over 25 bug
> fixes and improvements.
>
> The list of
On 9 June 2016 at 14:03, Martyn Taylor wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'd like to propose an Apache Artemis 1.3.0 release.
>
> Since 1.2.0 we've had a lot of fixes and improvements:
>
> * The OpenWire protocol implementation is now feature complete.
> * Equivalent implementations of
On 18 January 2016 at 15:53, Timothy Bish wrote:
> We seem to have a bit of a mess in our snapshots area with lots of old
> snapshots for ancient releases like 5.3, 5.4, etc along with snapshots
> for an ActiveMQ 6.0.0 release that has caused some confusion recently.
>
> Some
+1 (non-binding)
Verified the signature files, ran the source build, ran some of the
tests, used the staged maven artifacts with the Qpid JMS master build
and tests, kicked the tyres on the binary release with the Qpid JMS
HelloWorld example.
Robbie
On 2 February 2016 at 18:34, Christopher
On 3 February 2016 at 14:57, Timothy Bish wrote:
> New vote open for ActiveMQ-CPP v3.9.2
>
> This is a new patch release of the ActiveMQ-CPP client with a fix for
> how the STOMP protocol handlers deal with composite destinations.
>
> The source bundles for this release can
at 12:43 PM, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 01/20/2016 11:43 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>>> On 20 January 2016 at 15:16, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 01/20/2016 07:26 AM, Christopher Shannon wrote:
>>
The 5.12.2 version is still unreleased in JIRA, can someone with
permissions update it?
Robbie
Great, thanks.
On 22 February 2016 at 12:25, Christopher Shannon
<christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I updated JIRA and released 5.12.2, 5.12.3, and 5.11.4.
>
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 6:35 AM, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The 5
On 18 January 2016 at 18:46, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 18 January 2016 at 15:53, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> We seem to have a bit of a mess in our snapshots area with lots of old
>> snapshots for ancient releases like 5.3, 5.
4.0-SNAPSHOT if no one has any
>>> complaints.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/19/2016 04:34 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>>> > On 18 January 2016 at 18:46, Rob
gt; I can change the current 5.14-SNAPSHOT to 5.14.0-SNAPSHOT if no one has any
>> complaints.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/19/2016 04:34 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>>> On 18 Jan
(that I'm not entirely sure how successfully came
to actually get in there again) to be cleared out.
Robbie
On 26 January 2016 at 10:15, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Infra have now blown the repo contents away. The ActiveMQ 5 deploy job
> has run to publish
Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I had a mistake on a few examples.. and for some weird error 70
> succeeded creating the 1.1.1 that you probably saw? It's fixed now,
> and it shouldn't happen again.
>
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Robbie Gemmell
> <robbie.gem
Hi all,
I've raised https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-11842
regarding the svngit2jira bot failing to post updates to various (but
not all) JIRAs/projects, infra are looking into it.
Robbie
+1 (non-binding)
I gave things a check out by doing the following:
- Verified the signatures.
- Checked for licence + notice files being present.
- Ran the source build (only, no tests).
- Started the broker from the tar.gz binary, ran some AMQP client
examples against it.
- Used the staged maven
On 14 July 2016 at 16:46, Christopher Shannon
wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I have created the ActiveMQ 5.13.4 release and it's ready for a vote. This
> release has almost 30 bug fixes and improvements.
>
> The list of resolved issues is here:
>
Changing to the -n option to -f gives a preview listing of what would
be deleted. You can use -e flags to prevent deleting certain things,
like any IDE config dirs.
On 5 July 2016 at 00:26, John D. Ament wrote:
> Doing a git clean fixed it. But last time I blindly run a
If you really need a bridge for what you think then we need the project as
> suggested.
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 12:47 PM Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I would echo Tim's comments, particularly around test client code. I'm
>> in th
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
The mirrors take quite a while to sync and its typical to wait a while
after putting the files in the dist repo before announcing in order to
avoid the 404 errors most folks willcurrently be seeing.
Typically I wait 24+hrs to let essentially all of them update, but a
significant proportion are
On 22 February 2017 at 23:25, Timothy Bish wrote:
>
> Since the discussion around moving the NMS code to Git has died down now
> I've decided to just call a vote on the matter.
>
> The vote covers moving the following NMS projects SVN trees to their own
> respective Git
On 14 February 2017 at 19:32, Duane Pauls wrote:
> 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
On 15 February 2017 at 23:41, Jim Gomes wrote:
> Breaking this out into its own discussion thread...
>
> It has been proposed that Apache.NMS Subversion repository be moved to a
> Git repository. While the dominate reason seems to be "that's what
> everyone else is doing", I'm
Adding the right dev@ list back to the recipients this time...read on
below, if you didnt see it elsewhere already ;)
On 13 September 2016 at 22:59, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The mirrors just replicate whatever is on the main dist repo. They
> take a var
On 27 September 2016 at 18:40, Christopher Shannon
wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I have re-created the ActiveMQ 5.14.1 release and it's ready for a vote.
>
> The list of resolved issues is here:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
>
Seems like a good idea to me.
On 15 November 2016 at 11:45, Christopher Shannon
wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I just wanted to ask what people think about officially deprecating LevelDB
> in our 5.x broker and update our documentation to say that it is no longer
>
On 28 October 2016 at 05:56, Clebert Suconic wrote:
> There are a few modules on Artemis that I feel are a bit defunct. I
> don't really think anyone will be using it:
>
> - aerogear:
> * It's not working
> * I am not sure about the status of Aerogear
> *
The details are readily available on the website, at
http://activemq.apache.org/mailing-lists.html as various folks have
mentioned in earlier replies.
The unsubscribe addresses are of the form
-unsubscribe@, so for example in this case as listed
on the website they would be:
The content for most of the site is actually a Confluence wiki, which
is converted into the HTML pages for the website, with those then
being committed into an svn repo, and that being mirrored onto the
webservers upon commit by an svnpubsub process.
The 'source' for the website is mostly:
I know the infra team and some projects have some hosting on bintray
(https://bintray.com/apache/), and that can host .deb and .rpm.
Whether its used by projects to do that, and what any process around
that would be if they do, I'm not sure. Perhaps worth asking infra.
On 12 December 2016 at
What we do for Qpid is to have a central documentation/download etc
page that links to the latest release artifacts and documentation for
each component, but then also have specific pages for each component
release that includes the artifacts and docs for each specific
release. Those are also
Great. Thanks for all the work you've put in to making this happen, I
know it was much more involved than expected or it would have been in
the past, since it turns out that infra recently stopped doing these
migrations on our behalf locally and you instead had to migrate them
yourself remotely.
Looks great, though there are a couple of tiny issues. The TM text
near the logo is floating a bit out in the middle of nowhere, it
should possibly be part of the image itself so others using it pick it
up too. The shadowing around the content has a small break in it at
the top, may or may not be
For releases at Qpid we give each component release its own page that
has links to its downloads and docs etc. The main download and
documentation pages overview with direct links to current
downloads/docs for each componnent, but also link to a page listing
prior releases from the previous 2-3
mentioned extra work.. there's
> no extra work here :)
> It's actually saving me from screwing up eventually, so I take it as
> an improvement.
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Robbie Gemmell
> <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes, thats essentially
the dev repository Robbie is
>> mentioning... (that means.. we wouldn't really have an extra step).
>>
>>
>> On thing I'm not sure how to do is... how to upload it to the dev dist
>> at https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/activemq/
>>
>> and how we would make
t.
>
>
> Feel free to tweak the script. I will be out for a week. I will just
> finish the release and I will be away for a week.
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 5:48 AM Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Script looks good, though I'd tweak i
recommendation for
> signatures on the official release artifacts is a sha512 based signature,
> not the older sha1 that is used in the unofficial maven release artifacts.
>
> Refer here:
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution.html#sigs-and-sums
>
>
>>
>> On
download links to be in
> compliance with Apache processes.
>
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 6:14 AM, Robbie Gemmell
>> <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yep. I'm not sure exactly how much longer than this it has been the
>>> recomm
/activemq/artemis/ would
similarly improve things further there too, and can do that next if
folks are happy.
Robbie
On 15 September 2017 at 16:55, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I tweaked the helper script to verify the downloaded tar/zip files
> using thei
I've added some initial notes.
Robbie
On 5 October 2017 at 15:54, Bruce Snyder wrote:
> It is time to create a report for the ASF board for October. Please take 5
> minutes and contribute to the report available at the following URL:
>
>
On 6 September 2017 at 00:29, Clebert Suconic wrote:
> I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.3.0 release, CR2.
>
>
>
> We had these new features added as part of 2.3.0:
>
> [ARTEMIS-1270] - Provide a Management Console for Artemis
> [ARTEMIS-1322] - Add a
> few steps to remember as a release manager and it's easy to make mistakes,
> so I would prefer not to change the process unless there's a clear benefit
> that warrants it.
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
On 13 September 2017 at 14:35, Clebert Suconic
<clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:21 AM Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> This was less about time, though there is some benefit in that regard,
>> with how much d
pted, but it is still a bit more to do.
>>>>
>>>> That said, script provided to the reviewer could accomplish the same
>>>> things using the current staging location/setup.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, I’m -0 to the idea.Getting folks to ac
Hi folks,
I mentioned on the recent Artemis 2.3.0 vote that I had some suggested
changes for the release process improvements, not just for Artemis but
for other components too, and would send a mail later.
The short version is there are three main things I'd like to suggest
as improvements,
1 - 100 of 678 matches
Mail list logo