activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Confusion surrounding the ActiveMQ project roadmap
Date Wed, 15 Nov 2017 19:15:11 GMT
Not trying to push any directions here. But just wanted to point out that
Artemis could just be a codename. That would still allow a next version to
be whatever we want and change docs only.

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 10:42 AM Christopher Shannon <
christopher.l.shannon@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think it's pretty clear at this point that Artemis is the future.
> However, I don't know that renaming it to ActiveMQ 6 makes any sense as it
> would be a lot of work and more confusion.
>
> My opinion would be to just have the roadmap say Artemis is the future and
> recommended broker and drop plans to have an ActiveMQ 6 release.  We can
> just keep using the current versioning that Artemis is already using.
>
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Timothy Bish <tabish121@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On 11/15/2017 10:04 AM, Jiri Danek wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Justin Bertram <jbertram@redhat.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Ultimately I believe the decision is in the hands of the ActiveMQ PMC
> [1].
> >>>
> >>> Where can I find a list of PMC members for ActiveMQ? The closest I got
> to
> >> it is http://activemq.apache.org/team.html
> >>
> > The info for that is here:
> > https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?activemq
> >
> >
> > --
> > Tim Bish
> >
> >
>
-- 
Clebert Suconic

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