I added https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ACTIVEMQ/How+does+ActiveMQ+compare+to+Artemis and https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ACTIVEMQ/What+version+should+I+use to the General category of the FAQ; those updates should auto-populate on the web page within a day.
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 6:42 AM, John Leach <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 2015-06-30 at 13:20 +0200, Claus Ibsen wrote: > > Hi > > > > A good idea is to upgrade to latest release when doing an upgrade. New > > users should use latest release, eg 5.11.1. etc. > > > > Apollo is dead. > > > > Another alternative is the new Apache ActiveMQ Artemis. > > ah great,thanks for the update. I'd not even hear about Artemis, I'll > take a look. > > Can the website be updated in some way to make all of this clearer > perhaps? Even just a new entry would probably be enough. > > Thanks, > > John. > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 1:02 PM, John Leach <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'm struggling to understand from the website quite what versions of > > > ActiveMQ are supported. > > > > > > Currently there are two "patch" versions for the two latest minor > > > releases (5.10.1 and 5.11.1). Should a new user start at 5.11.1, or at > > > 5.10.1? Which version should someone on 5.9.x upgrade to? > > > > > > I think I know the answers (having been using amq for years and digging > > > through the mail archive) but the website doesn't make it obvious. I > > > don't know how to improve it - I just wanted to let you know about the > > > problem :) > > > > > > Also, the Apollo project page seems to have no timestamps anywhere! > > > There is a list of released versions but no hints as to when they were > > > released. From what I can gather, active development on it has somewhat > > > ceased but the website makes that hard to tell :) > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > John. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
