As you said there is a precedent for it but it's probably better for a major version. The biggest reason 5.x was not bumped was simply because of the whole "Artemis will become version 6.0" thing that prevented the bump for a long time.
Is there any reason we can't bump Artemis to 3.0.0? Requiring JDK 17 and Jetty 12 upgrade seem like a good reason for a major version bump and at the same time maybe could clean up any deprecated things hanging around. Maybe even drop the jms client entirely and just support jakarta, etc. It would be nice to see some of the outstanding spec issues resolved like https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-1262 before bumping but I assume that issue in particular won't ever be fixed as there is not a good way to avoid breaking old clients so I don't think it's a blocker to bump to 3.0.0. On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 1:04 PM Domenico Francesco Bruscino < bruscin...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > >
