activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andy Taylor <andy.tayl...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [HEADS UP] Artemis release this week
Date Mon, 23 Oct 2017 15:23:08 GMT
This probably warrants a separate thread

On 23 October 2017 at 16:11, Martes Wigglesworth <mwiggles@redhat.com>
wrote:

> Greetings Justin.
>
> Do you have any time to chat about the artemis implementation of
> ActiveMQConnectionFactory, and why the setters and getters were removed?
>
> We are working on integration of AMQ with bigdata tools and they are
> expecting AMQ-Artemis to behave as old AMQConnectionFactory used to.
>
> By this I am referencing the omission of an exposed interface for setting
> and getting brokerURL.
>
> Any insight on this topic would be appreciated, since I looked at a patch
> and it required either a legacy named wrapper of ActiveMQConnectionFactory,
> or ActiveMQJMSConnectionFactory, to re-insert the setBrokerURL and
> getBrokerURL.
>
> I figured this would get a huge "heck-no" from the team if I attempted to
> create an issue, and submit a pull request, so I wanted to verify the
> situation before moving forward.  (This is due to NiagraFiles requiring
> access to the brokerURL property, because of the assumed accessor methods
> which existed in AMQ prior to artemis.)
>
> Is there an internal AMQ dev list that I can get on, at RH?
>
> I apologize if this inquiry is out-of-scope for this list.
>
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Justin Bertram <jbertram@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm planning an Artemis release (2.4.0) later this week so anybody who
> > wants a fix should send a PR if they haven't already.
> >
> >
> > Justin
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Martes G Wigglesworth
> Senior Middleware Consultant
> Red Hat Consulting
> Red Hat, Inc.
> Office Phone: 804 343 6084 <callto:804%20343%206084> - 8136084
> Office Email: mwiggles@redhat.com
>

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