Yup agree and it means a new major version imho.
Le lun. 4 déc. 2023 à 13:19, Christopher Shannon < christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> a écrit : > Speaking of protocol changes, if we do generate a new openwire version to > add shared sub commands we have to actually fix the Openwire generator > including the CVE issue. > > On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 7:18 AM Christopher Shannon < > christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I don't see how we can release shared subscription support for 6.1.0 at > > this point. We haven't even come up with a plan of how we are going to > > implement it. There's multiple ways it could be done and probably > requires > > protocol changes. We have to decide how much work is done by the broker > and > > where. > > > > On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 2:18 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > > wrote: > > > >> I think it would better to complete JMS 2 in 6.1.0 including shared > topic > >> subscriptions. > >> We already did 6.0.x with partial JMS 2 support, which is so so from > user > >> perspective. > >> > >> I would prefer to wait few weeks for 6.1.0 to give us time to complete > JMS > >> 2. > >> > >> Regards > >> JB > >> > >> Le lun. 4 déc. 2023 à 07:52, Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com> a > écrit > >> : > >> > >> > Hey JB -- > >> > > >> > These JMS 2.0 features are planned for v6.1.0: > >> > > >> > AMQ-8464 PR #1046 6.1.0, 5.18.x JMSConsumer .receiveBody(Class) > methods > >> > AMQ-8320 PR #982 6.1.0, 5.18.x Delivery Delay Support for Message > >> > DeliveryDelay feature > >> > AMQ-8324 PR #1045 6.1.0, 5.18.x JMSProducer features Completion > >> Listener > >> > async send support > >> > > >> > This would just leave Shared Topic Subscriptions, which is currently > >> > planned for v6.2.0. > >> > > >> > AMQ-8323 6.2.0, 5.18.x Shared Topic Consumer Multi-consumer > >> (queue-like) > >> > consuming from topic subscriptions > >> > > >> > Reference: > >> > https://activemq.apache.org/jms2 > >> > > >> > I think this would work well, since we have Virtual Topic support > (which > >> > is better anyway). > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Matt > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Dec 2, 2023, at 11:00 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > >> > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > Hi > >> > > > >> > > I think it's really important to focus on JMS 2 complete impl for > >> 6.1.0. > >> > > That's the most important. > >> > > > >> > > I started to work on some impl, a couple are a little longer to > impl, > >> > > require tests etc. > >> > > I don't think early January is reasonable. I would rather try at the > >> > > end of January. > >> > > > >> > > I would rather: > >> > > 1. Focus on 6.0.2 for fixes (I'm preparing 5.18.x/5.17.x too as they > >> > > include fixes as well) > >> > > 2. Focus on 6.1.0 to complete JMS 2.x support. That's probably the > >> > > most important (honestly, I'm not a big fan of JMS 2.x support in > >> > > ActiveMQ 6.0.x, it could be confusing for users). > >> > > > >> > > Regards > >> > > JB > >> > > > >> > > On Sat, Dec 2, 2023 at 4:10 PM Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> All- > >> > >> > >> > >> I’ve started organizing some JIRAs for v6.1.0. I’m thinking > >> > early-January for release target timeframe. > >> > >> > >> > >> - Additional JMS 2.0 impls > >> > >> - New features for observability > >> > >> - Code base modernization > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks! > >> > >> Matt Pavlovich > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >
