I'd say the same. It is essentially the same amount of work to respin as it is to do another release, and it isnt a regression in this release, so I'd personally proceed and just use this as reason to do a quick 2.6.1 along with any other approriate fixes.
Robbie On 19 May 2018 at 15:27, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 05/18/2018 06:24 PM, Michael André Pearce wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> On upgrading to 2.5.0 we have found quite a blocking issue to 2.5.0 for >> anyone who secures durable queue creation so clients cannot create, but >> doesn’t secure non-durable. >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-1872 >> >> In summary prior to 2.5.0 the security check incorrectly always checked >> for security rights for non-durable, even if the queue was a durable, this >> was security hole was fixed in 2.5.0, but a knock on effect is it has >> highlighted/exposed some logic issues in the CoreClient and also in AMQP and >> OpenWire protocol managers, where in some cases a queue is not check for >> being present before calling create queue, meaning if user is not allowed to >> create a queue, but is allowed to consume, and the queue exists, the client >> still cannot consume, as the code tries to create and throws exception. >> >> We have created a test case that re-creates the issues, and also a >> possible solution its in PR here. >> >> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2093 >> >> Whilst it is not technically caused by any changes in the just created RC >> for 2.6.0 since 2.5.0, i think the severity/impact of this may deem it >> worthy to fix, and re-spin. >> >> Cheers >> Mike > > > This seems like a good opportunity to practice turning around a quick 2.6.1 > release as this is not a blocking issue given it's been in the code for > quite some time already. > > > >>> On 17 May 2018, at 20:02, Christopher Shannon >>> <christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 2:51 PM, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 05/16/2018 10:49 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote: >>>> >>>>> I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.6.0 release. >>>>> >>>>> The release notes can be found here: >>>>> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?versi >>>>> on=12342903&&projectId=12315920 >>>>> >>>>> There is a new commits report I made that I'm introducing on this >>>>> release: >>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/activemq/activemq-art >>>>> emis/2.6.0/artemis-2.6.0.html >>>>> >>>>> Source and binary distributions can be found here: >>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/activemq/activemq-artemis/2.6.0 >>>>> >>>>> The Maven repository is here: >>>>> >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheactivemq-1157 >>>>> >>>>> In case you want to give it a try with the maven repo on examples: >>>>> http://activemq.apache.org/artemis/docs/latest/hacking-guide >>>>> /validating-releases.html >>>>> >>>>> The source tag: >>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=activemq-artemis.g >>>>> it;a=tag;h=refs/tags/2.6.0 >>>>> >>>>> I will update the website after the vote has passed. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> [ ] +1 approve the release as Apache Artemis 2.4.0 >>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion >>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Here's my +1 >>>>> . >>>>> >>>>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> * Validate the signatures and checksums >>>> * Review license and notice files in the archives >>>> * Build from source and ran some of the tests >>>> * Ran binary broker and ran some samples and performance tests against >>>> it >>>> * Used mvn apache-rat:check to validate license headers in place >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Tim Bish >>>> twitter: @tabish121 >>>> blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/ >>>> >>>> >> > > -- > Tim Bish > twitter: @tabish121 > blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/ >
