Hi Justin

One request for inclusion into 0.30 from me:

QPID-6066 r1622176 [0-8..0-9-1] Client AMQSession#getQueueDepth() call
fails against pre 0.30 java brokers

This change addresses an interoperability issue affecting the non JMS API
call AMQSession#getQueueDepth when using 0-8 to 0-9-1.  It gives the user
the option to revert to old behaviour to avoid a defect present in earlier
Java Brokers.  Reviewed by both Rob and Oleksandr.

Kind regards, Keith.



On 2 September 2014 16:53, Justin Ross <[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks, approved.
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Rob Godfrey <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > OK - hopefully this will be the last one from me :-)
> >
> > QPID-6052 : [Java Client] The client does not correctly set the
> > JMSDestination on a 0-9-1 message in ADDR mode
> >
> > Commits:
> >
> > https://svn.apache.org/r1621143
> > https://svn.apache.org/r1621148
> > https://svn.apache.org/r1621149
> > https://svn.apache.org/r1621150
> > https://svn.apache.org/r1621826
> >
> > An issue in the ADDR address support for AMQP 0-9-1 that was added in to
> > 0.30 - the JMSDestination of an incoming message was not correctly set.
> >  This was discovered by a user doing testing:
> >
> >
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/qpid-users/201408.mbox/%[email protected]%3E
> >
> > They have subsequently confirmed that this changes fixes the issue:
> >
> >
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/qpid-users/201408.mbox/%[email protected]%3E
> >
> > And Robbie has reviewed the code changes and agreed with its inclusion
> > into 0.30:
> >
> >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-6052?focusedCommentId=14117512&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14117512
> >
> >
> > One thing to note is that in reviewing this change we identified an issue
> > in the 0-10 codepath which is still exists (that if you don't enable
> strict
> > JMS compliance, the subject is not correctly set in the address).  I
> don't
> > believe this is a new issue in 0-10 and was anyway unaffected by this
> work
> > for 0-9-1.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rob
> >
>

Reply via email to