It makes sense to me because the main JDK 11 builds already ended the full
support and are in the extended support phase.

On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 at 18:50, Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org> wrote:

> > What version of ActiveMQ Classic are you referring to making this change
> in a minor version? v6.0.0 made the jump to JDK 17, but 5.x did not.
>
> To be clear, I wasn't referring specifically to the move to 17. I was just
> saying, in general, the move to a new version of Java has been done in
> minor releases by both Artemis and Classic. I already outlined where this
> was done by Artemis (i.e. in 2.20.0). For Classic this has been done three
> times:
>
>  - From 5.10.x to 5.11.x the JDK went from 6 to 7
>  - From 5.14.x to 5.15.x the JDK went from 7 to 8
>  - From 5.16.x to 5.17.x the JDK went from 8 to 11
>
> My main point here is simply that this change has a precedent in ActiveMQ.
> There are, of course, precedents in other projects as well (e.g. Camel).
>
>
> Justin
>
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 11:40 AM Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > > On Dec 4, 2024, at 11:17 AM, Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > At first I was hesitant to propose this move in a minor release, but
> > then I
> > > realized we've already done this in both Artemis and Classic.
> >
> > Hi Justin-
> >
> > What version of ActiveMQ Classic are you referring to making this change
> > in a minor version? v6.0.0 made the jump to JDK 17, but 5.x did not.
> >
> > -Matt
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@activemq.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@activemq.apache.org
> > For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact
> >
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to