Re: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-19 Thread Christopher Shannon
The veto is for proposing to make new JMS 2.0 methods delegate to 1.1 methods in the client as that behavior is just wrong and makes no sense. On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 9:55 AM Justin Bertram wrote: > Pardon my ignorance, but why not help TomEE move to ActiveMQ Artemis which > already supports

Re: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-19 Thread Justin Bertram
Pardon my ignorance, but why not help TomEE move to ActiveMQ Artemis which already supports JMS 2.0? If I recall correctly one of the reasons that the HornetQ donation was originally accepted was because it provided JMS 2.0 support. This would save work on changes to the 5.x code-base and speed

Re: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-18 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofre
By the way, correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s what we discussed last year: start with the client the side, and then move forward for server side. What we planned in 5.16.x will be in 5.17.x. Regards JB > Le 19 mai 2021 à 06:05, Jean-Baptiste Onofre a écrit : > > Hi, > > The first step is at

Re: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-18 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofre
Hi, The first step is at least the client support, similar to what have been done on OpenEJB: https://github.com/apache/tomee/tree/master/container/openejb-core/src/main/java/org/apache/openejb/resource/activemq/jms2

Re: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-18 Thread Christopher Shannon
What exactly are you proposing? Full support would be a tremendous amount of work. I started a thread on this already a while back here: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-JMS-2-0-support-in-5-x-going-forward-td4757779.html My issue here is the lack of clarity. I have no clue what you

Re: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-18 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofre
It’s something that we already discussed and I moved forward on the PR. I propose to move forward on JMS 2.0 support. If the community agree, and tests are fine, I don’t see any issue to support it in 5.17.0 as best effort. Anyway, I will propose the PR, and see when to include it. Regards JB

Re: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-18 Thread Christopher Shannon
Since when is JMS 2.0 supposed to be supported by 5.17.0? None of the features are implemented on the server side for the new API calls. This was brought up in a dev discussion that there won't be JMS 2.0 support on the server side in this release. On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:29 AM Jean-Baptiste

Re: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-18 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofre
He’s not PMC but committer, so he can help anyway ;) Regards JB > Le 18 mai 2021 à 17:23, COURTAULT Francois > a écrit : > > Hello, > > I don't think Romain is still the PMC for TomEE. > > Best Regards. > > -Original Message- > From: Jean-Baptiste Onofre > Sent: mardi 18 mai 2021

RE: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-18 Thread COURTAULT Francois
Hello, I don't think Romain is still the PMC for TomEE. Best Regards. -Original Message- From: Jean-Baptiste Onofre Sent: mardi 18 mai 2021 17:19 To: users@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ? Hi, I’m sure I can ask help from

Re: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-18 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofre
Hi, I’m sure I can ask help from Romain about TomEE releases ;) Regards JB > Le 18 mai 2021 à 17:09, COURTAULT Francois > a écrit : > > Hello Jean-Baptiste, > > We are using ActiveMQ in TomEE context. > So I am just curious about when this version could be included in TomEE > releases. I

RE: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-18 Thread COURTAULT Francois
Hello Jean-Baptiste, We are using ActiveMQ in TomEE context. So I am just curious about when this version could be included in TomEE releases. I will push for that. Best Regards. -Original Message- From: Jean-Baptiste Onofre Sent: mardi 18 mai 2021 17:05 To:

Re: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-18 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofre
Hi, The purpose of the RC is to cut an early release (kind of "cut SNAPSHOT") to allow users to test it before the first "official" release. What I can propose to you is: 1. I need couple of weeks to open the PRs and merge it (I’m on JDK11 now, identifying/fixing/disabling some tests) 2. When

Re: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-18 Thread Simon Billingsley
Thanks for the details information. I am interested in the Log4J 2 upgrade. How long does the release take after the RC process normally? Best regards, Simon. On 18 May 2021, at 15:53, Jean-Baptiste Onofre mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote: Hi François, ActiveMQ 5.17.0 will support JMS 2.0.

RE: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-18 Thread COURTAULT Francois
Hello Jean-Baptiste, Good to know. So for a delivery end of July or and of August ? Will you run JMS TCK on it ? With Jakarta namespace or with javax namespace ? Best Regards. -Original Message- From: Jean-Baptiste Onofre Sent: mardi 18 mai 2021 16:53 To: users@activemq.apache.org

Re: Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-18 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofre
Hi François, ActiveMQ 5.17.0 will support JMS 2.0. Basically, what I’m planning for ActiveMQ 5.17.0: - JDK11 build - Spring 5 - Log4j2 - JMS 2.0 About date target, I’m working on JDK11 build now and the other PRs will follow. I would like to submit a first 5.17 RC end of June. Regards JB >

Which activeMQ (not Artemis) version will be JMS 2.0 or 3.0 ?

2021-05-18 Thread COURTAULT Francois
Hello, The question to be answered is in the Subject. Best Regards.