qpid-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Ross <justin.r...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid Broker-J 7.0.0 (RC2)
Date Tue, 07 Nov 2017 17:59:47 GMT
As an aside, switching the other Qpid components to use archive names of
the form apache-qpid-<component>-<version> works for me.  I'd like if
things were a bit neater in this regard.

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemmell@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Keeping the maven artifactId the same makes sense. Since the binary
> convenience gets posted with a classifier under the same ID, I could
> also see the argument around maintaining the brokers binary
> convenience archive name. That said, as it is moving download location
> most non-maven links are going to have the pattern broken regardless.
>
> The source release I would rename now, there is no historic convention
> to match for an independent broker source release, its the first
> independent release, and its a major release, so now is the point it
> should be named as desired. I'd suggest "apache-qpid-broker-j"
> personally.
>
> The contained source directory definitely seems like it needs fixed
> from qpid-java, and now would seem the time if concerned with not
> changing things too often.
>
> Its worth saying that the source and binary archive name dont actually
> need to match the same pattern. They never actually have before for
> the broker that I can think of. They also dont for many projects that
> use the apache parent poms implicit source bundle rather than creating
> their own. Though I do think it is nice when they match personally.
>
> Robbie
>
> On 7 November 2017 at 16:14, Oleksandr Rudyy <orudyy@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Rob,
> >
> > The binary bundle names and jar names were left unchanged in v7.0.
> > They are the same is in 6.x. That might help people having downloads
> > automated. We also publish binary bundles into maven.  We agreed
> > before to keep the maven artefacts unchanged. Though, I would also
> > prefer to name bundles using qpid-broker-j-.*. I personally even would
> > vote to rename broker jars into qpid-broker-j-.*. The source bundle
> > was named in similar way as the source bundle for qpid-java but we
> > missed to rename directory "qpid-java-7.0.0" inside of the source
> > bundle. It is definitely a bug. Though, nothing stops us from
> > repackaging of the source bundle and renaming folder there for v7.0.
> > I'll raise JIRA about renaming distribution bundles into
> > qpid-broker-j-.*.
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> > Alex
> >
> >
> > On 7 November 2017 at 15:29, Rob Godfrey <rob.j.godfrey@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> On 7 November 2017 at 15:14, Oleksandr Rudyy <orudyy@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> I've built Qpid Broker-J 7.0.0 RC2. The following issues have been
> resolved
> >>> since RC1:
> >>>
> >>> * QPID-7998 - [Broker-J] Allow global shared subscriptions but discard
> >>> their links on detach
> >>> * QPID-8019 - [Broker-J][WMC] Change link to broker documentation in
> web
> >>> management console
> >>>
> >>> Qpid Broker-J 7.0 brings the following major changes:
> >>>
> >>> * Improved AMQP 1.0 support
> >>> * Support for AMQP JMS Mapping Version 1.0 WD09
> >>> * Support for JMS 2.0 shared subscriptions (QPIDJMS-220)
> >>> * Improved message conversion for applications using different AMQP
> >>> protocols
> >>> * Improved direct memory management
> >>>
> >>> The list of new features, defect fixes and improvements can be found in
> >>> Jira:
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%
> >>> 3D%20QPID%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20qpid-java-broker-7.0.0
> >>>
> >>> The source and binary archives can be grabbed from here:
> >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/qpid/broker-j/7.0.0-rc2
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Out of interest, is there a reason why these archives are named
> >> "qpid-broker-7.0.0*", with the src then being within a "qpid-java-7.0.0"
> >> directory?  Would it not make more sense for these to both be
> >> "qpid-broker-j-7.0.0"?
> >>
> >> Certainly not a blocker for me, just seems a little inconsistent.
> >>
> >> -- Rob
> >>
> >>
> >>> Those files and the other maven artifacts are also staged for now at:
> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheqpid-1120
> >>>
> >>> Please test and cast your vote accordingly.
> >>>
> >>> Kind regards
> >>>
> >>> P.S. If you want to test it out using maven, you can temporarily add
> this
> >>> to your poms to access
> >>> the staging repo:
> >>>
> >>>   <repositories>
> >>>     <repository>
> >>>       <id>staging</id>
> >>>       <url>
> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheqpid-1120
> >>> </url>
> >>>     </repository>
> >>>   </repositories>
> >>>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@qpid.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@qpid.apache.org
>
>

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