activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <>
Subject Re: ActiveMQ 4.1.2? 4.2? ActiveIO 3.1? releases
Date Wed, 26 Mar 2008 05:28:00 GMT

On Mar 25, 2008, at 7:41 PM, Donald Woods wrote:

> Yep, I'd like to see those fixes in 2.1.1, but maybe an ActiveMQ  
> 4.1.2 release that still supports Java 1.4 for existing stand-alone  
> ActiveMQ users would be the best way to go for now.

I didn't really consider moving to java 5 (which involves only  
replacing the backport-concurrent classes with the  
java.util.concurrent classes) until I picked up the activeio-3.1- 
SNAPSHOT fix which has already moved definitively to java 5.  So I  
have no problem calling the activemq version 4.2 but keeping a java  
1.4 compatibility for activemq won't let you use it on java 1.4 due  
to the activeio changes.

I should have thought of and mentioned this in the original post...

david jencks
> -Donald
> Joe Bohn wrote:
>> David Jencks wrote:
>>> Geronimo is still using ActiveMQ 4 and I've applied patches for  
>>> or fixed a few bugs that are fairly important for getting MDBS  
>>> working reliably and fixing other problems.  So, I'd like to get  
>>> a release out of the 4.x branch for the upcoming Geronimo 2.1.1  
>>> release.
>> I agree ... it would be great to get those included in 2.1.1.
>>> I've looked through the jiras for 4.x and applied the patches for  
>>> ones that I had a clue about.  If anyone else wants something  
>>> fixed in 4.x please speak up.
>>> ActiveIO trunk has a fix that we'd like (don't put non-strings in  
>>> system properties) so I'd like to release ActiveIO 3.1 also.   
>>> Since that requires java 5 I'd like to update activemq 4 to use  
>>> java 5 also (I've tried and this is easy to do).  What's the  
>>> community feeling on this?  Is this a real no-no?  Would it be  
>>> better to have the version 4.2 and preserve 4.1.x for java 1.4 work?
>> I'm sure others have more informed opinions on this than I do.  I  
>> personally can't think of a reason that we should need another  
>> java 1.4 release but it certainly is nice to have the option ...  
>> so I think it would make sense to do the java 5 work in a 4.2  
>> branch.  Although I have to admit that I'm getting a little  
>> nervous at all the moving parts for 2.1.1.
>>> I'd like to also update the poms to use more modern maven release  
>>> procedures as well.... I haven't looked into this much yet and  
>>> will post further when I do.
>>> thanks
>>> david jencks

View raw message