Hi Chris

Thanks for your feedback. I will move forward on 6.2.0 prep as it will
include important dependency updates and fixes.

Agree for Jetty 12.1 in ActiveMQ 6.3.0, it should not be a problem to
update once we have the Jetty 12 support.
Also, it gives us time to test the GitHub Action in prep in addition
of Jenkins for CI.

I will start the 6.2.0 prep then.

Thanks !

Regards
JB

On Tue, Sep 23, 2025 at 10:55 PM Christopher Shannon
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Sorry for the late reply, going with 6.2.0 and waiting on Jetty for 6.3.0 is 
> fine to get things out faster.
>
> Jetty 12.1 is out so I'm wondering if it makes sense to just go right to 
> Jetty 12.1 at this point. The EE layer is decoupled so we can still target 
> Jakarta EE 9.
>
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 1:46 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Matt
>>
>> It's not a problem to postpone Jetty 12 to 6.3.x, targeting October.
>>
>> The first purpose of 6.2.0 is about important dependency updates (not
>> really backward compatible) to fix security issues.
>>
>> Let's keep the pace :)
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 8:45 PM Matt Pavlovich <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi JB-
>> >
>> > I don’t think Jetty 12 will be ready then, since we should not rush it and 
>> > risk a security issue with the web layer. Perhaps we target 6.3.0 for 
>> > October with Jetty 12?
>> >
>> > I plan to merge Virtual Thread experimental support and other minor 
>> > clean-up PRs for 6.2.0.
>> >
>> > Bigger changes, such as SSLContext-migrate-from-ThreadLocal will wait for 
>> > 6.3.x or 6.4.x.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Matt
>> >
>> > > On Sep 16, 2025, at 6:45 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> 
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hi folks,
>> > >
>> > > Regarding important dependencies updates (spring, common, ...), and
>> > > timing, I propose to move "faster" on the ActiveMQ 6.2.0 release.
>> > >
>> > > What about submitting to vote both 6.1.8 and 6.2.0 by the end of this
>> > > week/beginning of next week ?
>> > >
>> > > I will tackle PRs for 6.2.0 now that I'm back from CommuntyOverCode.
>> > >
>> > > Regards
>> > > JB
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 4:12 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> 
>> > > wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> Hi folks,
>> > >>
>> > >> FYI, I'm opening several PRs to start the 6.2.0 release prep.
>> > >>
>> > >> I will keep you posted.
>> > >>
>> > >> Regards
>> > >> JB
>> > >>
>> > >> On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 10:54 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>> > >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Hi
>> > >>>
>> > >>> It's a good comment Colm and that's exactly the proposal about
>> > >>> ActiveMQ 6.2.0 release.
>> > >>> The purposes of ActiveMQ 6.2.0 are:
>> > >>> 1. Bump "major" dependency version (Spring, Jetty, etc)
>> > >>> 2. Include new Jakarta Messaging 3.1 features
>> > >>>
>> > >>> So we are on the same page here.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I proposed 6.2.0 for October, and I think we are on track. Matt worked
>> > >>> on Jetty 12 update, and I will help on that.
>> > >>> For the other major version bumps, it's almost done.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Regards
>> > >>> JB
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 10:47 AM Colm O hEigeartaigh 
>> > >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Hi,
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> It's increasingly a problem that the only ActiveMQ classic releases 
>> > >>>> available use EOL libraries (Spring 6.1, Jetty 11), in terms of 
>> > >>>> running CVEs in production. I'd like to respectfully request that the 
>> > >>>> focus is on updating to Jetty 12 and releasing, rather than delaying 
>> > >>>> AMQ 6.2.0 for other features. I'm happy to help out with dependency 
>> > >>>> updates, testing etc.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Thanks,
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Colm.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> On 2025/08/08 13:20:20 Matt Pavlovich wrote:
>> > >>>>> For 6.2.0 I propose merging the Virtual Thread tech preview feature 
>> > >>>>> and move to Jetty 12.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> The Jetty 12 PR is ~80% complete.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Matt Pavlovich
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>> On Aug 7, 2025, at 5:38 PM, Christopher Shannon 
>> > >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> JB,
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Sorry for the delayed response, I think the time frame for a 6.1.8 
>> > >>>>>> release
>> > >>>>>> is fine.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> For 6.2.0 that timeline seems ok assuming it's ready by that date, 
>> > >>>>>> I would
>> > >>>>>> need to go back and look at the proposals for the new Jakarta 
>> > >>>>>> features, but
>> > >>>>>> is there any particular one you had in mind to include?
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 3:39 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>> > >>>>>> <[email protected]>
>> > >>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> I propose:
>> > >>>>>>> 1. ActiveMQ Classic 6.1.8 by end of August/beginning of September, 
>> > >>>>>>> as
>> > >>>>>>> a maintenance release, containing several fixes and dependency 
>> > >>>>>>> updates
>> > >>>>>>> 2. ActiveMQ Classic 6.2.0 by end of October/beginning of November. 
>> > >>>>>>> The
>> > >>>>>>> purpose here is to add at least one new feature to support Jakarta
>> > >>>>>>> Messaging 3.x.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Thoughts ?
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> In the meantime, I'm working on a prototype for ActiveMQ Classic 
>> > >>>>>>> 7.x,
>> > >>>>>>> removing Spring dependency and using service discovery mechanism 
>> > >>>>>>> (for
>> > >>>>>>> destination policies, transport connectors, etc). Also I'm resuming
>> > >>>>>>> the investigation about replicated KahaDB.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Thanks
>> > >>>>>>> Regards
>> > >>>>>>> JB
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > >>>>>>> For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > >>>>> For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > >>>> For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >
>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > > For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact
>> >
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact
>>
>>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact


Reply via email to