activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher Shannon <christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Confusion surrounding the ActiveMQ project roadmap
Date Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:51:47 GMT
Jeff,

I don't think anyone is proposing killing off 5.x at this point, but just
clarifying what the future is in terms of Artemis and ActiveMQ 6.  I do
think we need to retire Apollo though.

Chris

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 12:41 PM, jgenender <jgenender@apache.org> wrote:

> I'll throw in my .02 on this...
>
> I think the discussion should be here and in the open and I am confident
> the
> PMC will decide based on the community, and not on their personal view.
>
> I also think we need to be very careful in any discussion about sun-setting
> AMQ 5.X.  "Classic" as it has been discussed still is the #1 installed MQ
> in
> the world.  It is most certainly heavily used, still much more so than
> Artemis (at least from my view).  As long as the community is strong, AMQ
> 5.X should continue forward.
>
> I am looking forward to Artemis becoming ActiveMQ 6.  IMHO, it should be
> called ActiveMQ because I believe that was the original intent... that
> Artemis was the code name, and it would be ActiveMQ 6 once it hit 1.0 (at
> least that's what I thought was going to happen).  If we want people to
> take
> Artemis as a part of ActiveMQ, and we want to up its game regarding usage
> and community, I really think keeping it in the ActiveMQ lineup is really
> the way to go.  I hopefully look forward to that as I really want to see a
> lot more installations of the product. :-)
>
> Just my usual .02.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-
> f2341805.html
>

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