Hi Christopher, Agree for the Jira, my bad, I'm creating the Jira today for the tracking.
For 5.16.x, it sounds like a plan. I will release 5.15.10 and then, I will move forward on 5.16.0 preparation with JDK 11 support (build and runtime). Thanks ! Regards JB On 14/05/2019 16:17, Christopher Shannon wrote: > Yes they were minor but we currently use Jira for the release notes so it's > good to have visibility to users know what changed. > > Master is already on 5.16.0-SNAPSHOT. It's fine to do a 5.15.10 my point > is just that it's pretty clear we need to get 5.16.0 out the door if we are > already hitting 10 point releases for 5.15 so I would like to get that JDK > 11 support figured out. If there's issues with building with JDK 11 then > we could always wait for build compatibility for the next release but at > least make sure it's runtime compatible with JDK 11. > > On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 8:27 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> The PRs without Jira were minor, but I will create the corresponding >> Jira anyway, at least for the tracking. >> >> For the release, I propose the following: >> >> 1. Release 5.15.10 with the merge >> 2. Once 5.15.10 is released, I will create 5.16.x branch focus on JDK 11 >> support. >> >> Thoughts ? >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> On 14/05/2019 12:45, Christopher Shannon wrote: >>> Also, one more thing, you merged a bunch of PRs today but none of them >> have >>> Jiras. We need to have Jiras for all of those so that we can track the >>> commits in the release notes. >>> >>> On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 6:34 AM Christopher Shannon < >>> christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Ooops, I read the proposal as 5.15.0 not 5.15.10 :) >>>> >>>> So I think my opinion probably stands either way. We could do a 5.15.10 >>>> but we really need to get 5.16.0 out the door and stop doing patch >> releases >>>> on 5.15.x. The only thing holding back 5.16.0 is the JDK 11 support but >>>> there's some nice improvements to 5.16.0 that I would like to see >> released >>>> (such as some KahaDB improvements) >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 6:32 AM Christopher Shannon < >>>> christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I assume you mean 5.16.0 >>>>> >>>>> I've probably mentioned this a few times in various posts and chat but >> my >>>>> opinion is we need to support JDK 11 so I consider this issue a blocker >>>>> until resolved. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-7087 >>>>> >>>>> 5.16.0 should still be compatible to run on JDK 8 or JDK 11 but (since >>>>> JDK 11 is the new LTS build) we should be able to run a build and pass >> all >>>>> tests using both 8 and 11 as well. I have done work here to get it to >>>>> build with JDK 11 but all of the OSGi tests and stuff are broken and >> I'm >>>>> not sure how to fix it as I haven't worked very much with OSGi. >>>>> >>>>> Here is the commit I started work on 6 months ago: >>>>> >> https://github.com/cshannon/activemq/commit/68c91621a0568a0d47e66a800833e1770c27b7d8 >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 1:53 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi team, >>>>>> >>>>>> I started to review some PRs and I'm also working on some >>>>>> improvements/fixes PR (for OSGi, but also preparing better cloud >> support >>>>>> features). >>>>>> >>>>>> I would like to submit to vote ActiveMQ 5.15.10 over the week end or >>>>>> beginning of next week. >>>>>> >>>>>> No objection ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> JB >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>>>>> jbono...@apache.org >>>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net >>>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >> > -- Jean-Baptiste Onofré jbono...@apache.org http://blog.nanthrax.net Talend - http://www.talend.com
