geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hiram Chirino" <hi...@hiramchirino.com>
Subject Re: Getting Geronimo to use an upcoming ActiveMQ 4.x release and the activemq-gbean & activemq-gbean-management modules
Date Fri, 24 Mar 2006 18:27:19 GMT
Just that I want to redesign some of the interfaces that geronimo's
security module is using.  So it's best to keep G on version that's
currently using.  I'm not so worried having amq depend on changing
interfaces since I can keep them in sync much easier.

Regards,
Hiram

On 3/23/06, Matt Hogstrom <matt@hogstrom.org> wrote:
> I'll note that.  Hiram...any reason you can think of that would stop us from
> testing the newer ActiveIO on the 1.0.0 build to shake out any issues?
>
>
> Hiram Chirino wrote:
> > Hi John,
> >
> > On 3/23/06, John Sisson <jrsisson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Cross posting to dev@geronimo so the Geronimo team is involved in
> >>discussions regarding ActiveMQ integration, as I don't think the missing
> >>gbean support in ActiveMQ 4.0 has been discussed on the Geronimo dev list.
> >>
> >>The missing gbean support was a surprise to me as I wasn't expecting
> >>ActiveMQ 4.0 to be missing the functionality that it had in ActiveMQ
> >>3.2.1 currently used by Geronimo.  I was expecting 4.0 to almost be a
> >>drop in replacement, except for the change of package names.  I was
> >>hoping to play with a 4.0-RCx release with Geronimo.
> >>
> >>I am concerned about Geronimo staying with a 3.2.x release when it has
> >>been mentioned that 4.0 should be more stable and a number of bugs in
> >>3.2.x have only been fixed in the 4.0 code.
> >>
> >>Hiram, when you have an idea of the effort required to implement the
> >>GBeans support ActiveMQ 4.x let's discuss time frames for Geronimo to
> >>moving to an ASF hosted ActiveMQ release.
> >>
> >
> >
> > I just took a stab at porting the old gbeans to 4.x and everything is
> > compiling now again.  So I think for 4.x we should have at least the
> > same level of crappy integration that 3.x had.  I'm hoping we can do
> > better though.  I started to test with Geronimo 1.1 and I've him my
> > first big issue.  ActiveMQ 4.x depends on activeio 2.1 which is not
> > compatible with the version Geronimo uses.  So I think I'll work on
> > upgrading activemq to use activeio 3.x which CAN be concurrently used
> > with the version Geronimo uses.  I would just upgrade Geronimo's
> > security module to use the 2.x or 3.x but activeio's interfaces are
> > still not pinned down and I want to avoid other folks from breaking
> > next time it changes.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Hiram
> >
> >
> >
> >>Regards,
> >>
> >>John
> >>
> >>Hiram Chirino wrote:
> >>
> >>>Hi John,
> >>>
> >>>Yep it will be needed.  We need to update it so that it works with the
> >>>new 4.x way of updating stuff.  Should not be to hard to get it
> >>>working again now that 4.x has stabilized.  What would be nice is to
> >>>have a better set of gbeans than what we had with ActiveMQ 3.x.  The
> >>>3.x gbeans allow you to configure about 5% of the options that
> >>>activemq allows you to tweak using the standard activemq.xml files.  I
> >>>was hoping we could improve this for 4.x.
> >>>
> >>>Regards,
> >>>Hiram
> >>>
> >>>On Mar 21, 2006, at 1:33 AM, John Sisson wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>What needs to be done to Geronimo to use ActiveMQ 4.0-RC1 when it is
> >>>>available for testing?
> >>>>
> >>>>I noticed the activemq-gbean module (that was available in previous
> >>>>ActiveMQ releases used by Geronimo) is under the sandbox with some
> >>>>svn log comments about it not being operational.
> >>>>Won't this be needed for embedding ActiveMQ in Geronimo?
> >>>>
> >>>>Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>>John
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Hiram
> >
> >
> >
>


--
Regards,
Hiram

Mime
View raw message