> > Should we remove REST from ActiveMQ "Classic" as well?
Do the reasons for removal are the same as those presented at the beginning of this thread? As far as I understand, REST from ActiveMQ Classis it´s working. My two cents is that the usage of the https://activemq.apache.org/rest should be analyzed before voting for deprecation. El lun, 12 sept 2022 a las 14:59, Tetreault, Lucas (<tetlu...@amazon.com.invalid>) escribió: > Should we remove REST from ActiveMQ "Classic" as well? I think the same > arguments apply about it being abandonware, etc. > > We could deprecate it in the upcoming 5.18.0 release and use this as > incentive to cut a 6.0.0 release? __ That would be exciting! > > - Lucas > > On 2022-09-12, 7:41 AM, "Clebert Suconic" <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do > not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and > know the content is safe. > > > > I will go ahead and remove it... > > > I will also bump upstream/main as 3.0 as part of the removal. > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 2:24 PM Clebert Suconic > <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I didn’t meant to imply I was going to remove it now > > > > I intend to do it on Monday. If no objection. > > > > > > Although keeping it means we would have to fix it. I honestly > don’t see many options to keep it. > > > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 1:09 PM Robbie Gemmell < > robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> While I'm fine with it going I'd maybe give other folks more of > chance > >> to reply...or at least use lay concensus style 'ill do it at <date> > if > >> noone objects' :) > >> > >> On Thu, 8 Sept 2022 at 17:48, Clebert Suconic < > clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > I will go ahead and remove it... > >> > > >> > > >> > to be honest I don't believe much in rest from JMS due to the > session > >> > and stateful nature. > >> > > >> > > >> > But if we were to provide REST for our users, I would rather > bring the > >> > servlet from AMQ5. it would be a major task anyway... and this > >> > module has to go for sure. > >> > > >> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 10:20 AM Robbie Gemmell < > robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > It has looked to be rotting for a long time, and requires > various user > >> > > hoop jumping I dont expect many/any folks are interested in > doing....I > >> > > think removing it makes sense. > >> > > > >> > > On Thu, 8 Sept 2022 at 14:54, Clebert Suconic < > clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > I'm not sure if there's much to discuss here. Rest in Artemis > has been > >> > > > abandonware for a while (like 5 years)... The jboss-rest > interface is > >> > > > a few major releases behind, the module compiles but it's not > >> > > > functional, and any time someone ask questions we just > mention don't > >> > > > use it... (favoring stomp instead). > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/tree/main/artemis-rest > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > As part of new logging changes, we are moving > activemq-artemis into 3.0... > >> > > > > >> > > > At this point I see no other choice than remove the module. > >> > > > > >> > > > Any objections? > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > Clebert Suconic > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Clebert Suconic > > > > -- > > Clebert Suconic > > > > -- > Clebert Suconic > > -- Atentamente: César Hernández.
