Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Broker-J 7.0.0 (RC2)

As an aside, switching the other Qpid components to use archive names of the form apache-qpid-- works for me. I'd like if things were a bit neater in this regard. On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > Keeping the maven artifactId the same makes

Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Broker-J 7.0.0 (RC2)

Keeping the maven artifactId the same makes sense. Since the binary convenience gets posted with a classifier under the same ID, I could also see the argument around maintaining the brokers binary convenience archive name. That said, as it is moving download location most non-maven links are going

Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Broker-J 7.0.0 (RC2)

On 7 November 2017 at 16:41, Keith W wrote: > As Alex says, we opted to keep the bundle names, directories structure > within bundles and maven artefact names unchanged, The reasoning was > that the change would need to ripple through the users job control > scripts,

Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Broker-J 7.0.0 (RC2)

As Alex says, we opted to keep the bundle names, directories structure within bundles and maven artefact names unchanged, The reasoning was that the change would need to ripple through the users job control scripts, distribution systems etc. If there are strongly held opinions let's hear them

Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Broker-J 7.0.0 (RC2)

Rob, The binary bundle names and jar names were left unchanged in v7.0. They are the same is in 6.x. That might help people having downloads automated. We also publish binary bundles into maven. We agreed before to keep the maven artefacts unchanged. Though, I would also prefer to name bundles

C++ Broker: combine bindings and routes

Hello All, Please could you help me with a problem combining bindings and routes. I am running Qpid C++ Broker 1.36.0 on Ubuntu. What I want to reach: Producer P1 sends a durable message to a durable queue Q1 at broker B1. B1 sends the message to broker B2 where consumer C1 should read the

Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Broker-J 7.0.0 (RC2)

On 7 November 2017 at 15:14, Oleksandr Rudyy wrote: > Hi all, > > I've built Qpid Broker-J 7.0.0 RC2. The following issues have been resolved > since RC1: > > * QPID-7998 - [Broker-J] Allow global shared subscriptions but discard > their links on detach > * QPID-8019 -

[VOTE] Release Qpid Broker-J 7.0.0 (RC2)

Hi all, I've built Qpid Broker-J 7.0.0 RC2. The following issues have been resolved since RC1: * QPID-7998 - [Broker-J] Allow global shared subscriptions but discard their links on detach * QPID-8019 - [Broker-J][WMC] Change link to broker documentation in web management console Qpid Broker-J

Re: Qpid Dispatch Router 1.0.0 Release Candidate

On 18/10/17 21:29, Ted Ross wrote: Team, RC1 of Qpid Dispatch Router version 1.0.0 can be found here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/qpid/dispatch/1.0.0-rc1/ Please use this for testing and evaluation. I will hold off the vote until there has been some testing done. There have

Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Broker-J 7.0.0 (RC1)

Hi all, The vote is cancelled. As discussed at [1] we are going to spin another RC incorporating the changes in [2] to have JMS 2.0 global shared subscription enabled by default. Kind Regards, Alex [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/qpid-dev/201711.mbox/browser [2]

Re: Accumulation of Links from global shared durable subscriptions (JMS 2.0)

On Tue, 2017-11-07 at 10:43 +, Rob Godfrey wrote: > On 7 November 2017 at 10:26, Lorenz Quack wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 2017-11-07 at 09:51 +, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Lorenz, > > > > > > This sounds/looks good to me overall, though I wonder

Re: Accumulation of Links from global shared durable subscriptions (JMS 2.0)

On 7 November 2017 at 10:26, Lorenz Quack wrote: > On Tue, 2017-11-07 at 09:51 +, Robbie Gemmell wrote: >> On 6 November 2017 at 14:42, Lorenz Quack wrote: >> > >> > On Mon, 2017-11-06 at 11:07 +, Lorenz Quack wrote: >> > > >> > > On Mon,

Re: Accumulation of Links from global shared durable subscriptions (JMS 2.0)

On 6 November 2017 at 14:42, Lorenz Quack wrote: > On Mon, 2017-11-06 at 11:07 +, Lorenz Quack wrote: >> On Mon, 2017-11-06 at 10:14 +, Robbie Gemmell wrote: >> > >> > On 3 November 2017 at 16:58, Rob Godfrey wrote: >> > > >> > > >> > > On