activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rob DellaFortuna" <rob.dellafort...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release 4.0 of ActiveMQ
Date Wed, 24 May 2006 14:14:27 GMT
For this release, are there plans to bring the Openwire dotnet client up to
spec with the current 4.0 java implementation?

Cheers,
 Rob.

On 5/22/06, Hiram Chirino <hiram@hiramchirino.com> wrote:
>
> Ok. quick status report on the 718 issue.  I applied the patch and the
> good news is that subsequent openwire version is still compatible with
> version that is in the current 4.0 release candidate that we voted on.
> This is because our Java implementation of openwire does not
> use/validate the size prefix on each command.  That size prefix was
> put there to support future NIO based transports and other openwire
> implementations where having the size prefix makes it easier to
> implement the protocol.
>
> So I'm all for just including the patch as bug fix in the next (4.1)
> release of activemq.  So I'm still at +1 for releasing the current
> binary.
>
> On 5/22/06, Hiram Chirino <hiram@hiramchirino.com> wrote:
> > so 718 was partially valid.  I'm going to rebuild and test the new
> > client against the 4.0 rc.  If the patch does not break compatibility
> > with 4.0, then I think we can let 4.0 go out as is.  if it does break
> > compatibility then I think we will need to recut a new release
> > candidate for 4.0.
> >
> > Any opinions?
> >
> >
> > On 5/22/06, Hiram Chirino <hiram@hiramchirino.com> wrote:
> > > Opps.  I just reviewed that patch. and It does not seem to be valid.
> > > I think I may have jumped the gun on putting in my -1.  So I'm
> > > retracting my -1 for now, and asking for anybody out there that is
> > > interested in the openwire internals to peek into the AMQ-718 and
> > > double check me.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > On 5/22/06, Hiram Chirino <hiram@hiramchirino.com> wrote:
> > > > I retract my +1..  This issue has just been reported:
> > > >
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-718
> > > >
> > > > We have a small inconsistency in our wireformat that if we don't fix
> > > > now, we will never be able to fix.
> > > >
> > > > So -1 on the release, and I'll start working on applying the
> provided
> > > > patch.  Thanks for the sharp eyes Andrew Lusk!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 5/20/06, Alan D. Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
> > > > > James Strachan wrote:
> > > > > > We've had the 4.0 release cut for a little while and we've
> tested it
> > > > > > out and it seems to be fine and to comply with the various
> release
> > > > > > requirements (notice file, incubator disclaimers, license files
> etc)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> http://people.apache.org/~chirino/incubator-activemq-4.0/maven1/incubator-activemq/distributions/
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The release notes will show up here as soon as the mirrors catch
> up...
> > > > > > http://incubator.apache.org/activemq/activemq-40-release.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > if you are impatient, here's the wiki page for the release
> notes:
> > > > > >
> http://goopen.org/confluence/display/ACTIVEMQ/ActiveMQ+4.0+Release
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please vote to approve this release binary
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [ ] +1 Release the binary as ActiveMQ 4.0
> > > > > > [ ] -1 Veto the release (provide specific comments)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If this vote passes, then we will then ask the Incubator PMC
for
> their
> > > > > > blessing to ship this release officially.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here's my +1
> > > > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > Congrats on all the great work!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Alan
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Hiram
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Hiram
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Hiram
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Hiram
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message