activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher Shannon <christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [HEADSUP] ActiveMQ 5.12.1 Release Preparation
Date Tue, 22 Sep 2015 21:21:13 GMT
That is a good point and I agree that issue should be resolved for 5.12.1.
However, I am also having a hard time determining if the behavior change is
a bug or not for the same reasons you pointed out.

On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org> wrote:

>
> > On Sep 22, 2015, at 4:36 PM, Christopher Shannon <
> christopher.l.shannon@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > It's been about a month since 5.12.0 was released and there are already a
> > good number of fixes contributed towards 5.12.1 so I'd like to start
> > working on a 5.12.1 release in a few days.
> >
> > If there is anything major that would be a blocker, let me know.
> >
> > Here are the current release notes:
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12311210&version=12333269
>
> Well, I’d like to understand what is going on with
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5966 a bit first.   It’s
> definitely a behavior change (and thus should have been documented in
> release notes at the very least).    What I’m still struggling with is
> trying to determine if it’s a bug or not.
>
> That said, the commit that introduced the change did not include a unit
> test.  The log points at a fuse JIRA that is obviously completely
> unrelated.   Thus, I have no idea why that change was even put in.   I’m
> tempted to back it out.
>
>
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
>
>

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