I was going to release today, however these tests are failing on the 2.6.x branch:
org.apache.activemq.artemis.tests.integration.management.QueueControlTest.testGetMessagesAdded[durable=false] org.apache.activemq.artemis.tests.integration.openwire.OpenWireGroupingTest.testGrouping[core-send=true core-receive=true] org.apache.activemq.artemis.tests.integration.openwire.OpenWireGroupingTest.testGrouping[core-send=false core-receive=true] org.apache.activemq.artemis.tests.integration.openwire.cluster.TemporaryQueueClusterTest.testClusteredQueue On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 6:21 AM Christopher Shannon <[email protected]> wrote: > > I agree that 2.7.0 can wait until January at this point because of the > holidays coming up for a lot of people however it is way past due in my > opinion. > > In general I would like to see Artemis released much more frequently than > it currently is. Artemis is very active with constant new features and bug > fixes so we should be releasing consistently to get things out there so > people can use them. With as much stuff going into it every day we could > probably do something like a monthly release and have plenty to show for it. > > I don't really see a reason to hold up a release for any new feature (bug > fixes are different of course) because there are already so many features > that are done that haven't been released. For example, I added support for > changing the defaultConsumerWindowSize per address back in October and at > least 3 people have asked about that feature and I keep having to tell them > it's not out yet. > > If AMQP large message support isn't quite ready then no big deal...you just > put it into 2.8.0 and release it relatively soon after. There's no reason > a feature has to be tied to a specific version when you can always just > increase the version number by 1 (the exception being breaking changes > obviously and major things that would make more sense in a major version > number change) > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 1:43 PM Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Thanks. i had a heads up before on another thread but I couldn’t do > > because of my workload on the task I was working on. > > > > > > I will cut today and the vote thread sent tomorrow morning or later > > tonight. > > > > I personally want 2.7.0 out early next year. I will work proactively on > > that (and welcome anyone’s help on that) > > > > It would be nice to have large message streamed in AMQP as we convert to > > core right now. That’s the main thing I held a 2.7.0 release before. If I > > can’t do it I will still do it. But if anyone is willing to help here it > > would be awesome. > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:57 AM Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > I'd say it has already been too long since the last one so I wouldnt > > > wait until next year. A heads up is nice, and somewhat required when > > > its been a long cycle and especially so if previous heads up have been > > > missed. In this case I'd personally say it would be fine to proceed > > > even later today if it seems ready and noone specifically objects, so > > > it is out before people start to disappear for holidays. Other > > > versions numbers are still available if anyone needs to do another > > > release after. > > > > > > Robbie > > > > > > On Mon, 17 Dec 2018 at 16:03, Clebert Suconic <[email protected] > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Would be too bad if I cut this tomorrow? So we have time for a vote > > > before > > > > the Christmas week. Or anyone would rather have it next year ? > > > > > > > > I had promised few weeks back but i was busy with a big chunk of work > > > > around performance on AMQP. > > > > -- > > > > Clebert Suconic > > > > > -- > > Clebert Suconic > > -- Clebert Suconic
