Looks good over here.

+1

--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

Le mer. 12 nov. 2025, 22:44, Ken Liao <[email protected]> a écrit :

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> I checked:
> Web console functionality
>
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 3:17 AM Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > I checked things out as follows:
> > - Verified the signature and checksum files.
> > - Checked for LICENCE + NOTICE files present in the archives.
> > - Checked headers in the source archive with: mvn apache-rat:check
> > - Ran the source build [only] on JDK 21.
> > - Ran the Qpid JMS 2.9.0 HelloWorld example against a broker started
> > from the staged tar.gz binary on JDK 21.
> >
> > Robbie
> >
> > On Tue, 11 Nov 2025 at 16:07, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I also think it makes sense to just update the notes to mention it for
> > > 6.3.0 instead (or a future 6.2.x, given there is no change in the
> > > existing stuff, or from the new stuff unless you ask to use it) given
> > > everything you discussed below.
> > >
> > > On Tue, 11 Nov 2025 at 14:39, Christopher Shannon
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I didn't realize that CI was still only using JDK 17 and I agree that
> > > > should be bumped to 21. The release is already done and so far looks
> > fine
> > > > to me (I was about to vote +1 until I saw this issue come up) so
> > because of
> > > > that the simplest thing is just to update the release notes for that
> > > > feature and move it to 6.3.0 so we don't hold up 6.2.0. The plan is
> to
> > > > release 6.3.0 quicker anyways and it isn't like any should be using
> > Virtual
> > > > threads right now before JDK 24 because of the pinning issue. And
> > ActiveMQ
> > > > probably doesn't even work with JDK 24 or JDK 25 yet for the same
> > reason
> > > > Artemis needed to be fixed. (The Subject class and scoped variables,
> > etc)
> > > >
> > > > This was Matt's feature, so as long as Matt is ok moving it to
> 6.3.0, I
> > > > think we can just keep the release as is.
> > > >
> > > > Chris
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Nov 11, 2025 at 9:22 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> [email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I would add that both enforcer AND Jenkins should have been updated
> > to
> > > > > JDK21 min to reflect that.
> > > > >
> > > > > As a reminder, the purpose of 6.2.0 is mostly about Jetty and
> Spring
> > > > > CVE (updates). That's why I'm proposing to remove VirtualThread
> from
> > > > > the Release Notes, and move forward with this RC.
> > > > >
> > > > > However, I'm totally fine to cancel this RC, update enforcer and
> > > > > Jenkins and do a new RC with JDK21.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Nov 11, 2025 at 3:04 PM Christopher Shannon
> > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -1 for now until we figure out the situation with the virtual
> > thread
> > > > > stuff.
> > > > > > We probably should rebuild with JDK 21 because 6.2.0 includes the
> > virtual
> > > > > > thread feature. The other option as Robbie said is we remove that
> > part
> > > > > from
> > > > > > the release notes and include it for 6.3.0 only.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This same issue just came up with Artemis recently (although JDK
> > 25). The
> > > > > > intent here is that we only require JDK 17 for runtime but if a
> > user is
> > > > > > optionally using JDK 21+ then with the multi release jar the new
> > virtual
> > > > > > thread feature is available.
> > > > > > Because the Virtual thread stuff is there with the multi release
> > jar we
> > > > > > must build the release with JDK 21+ when doing the actual
> release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We should use the maven enforcer plugin to require JDK 21 to be
> > used
> > > > > during
> > > > > > releases to prevent this issue in the future. We don't need to
> > require it
> > > > > > during all builds, but when doing the official release it needs
> to
> > be
> > > > > used
> > > > > > so all the correct jars are built.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Nov 11, 2025 at 8:58 AM Francois Papon <
> > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > François
> > > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Le 09/11/2025 à 13:44, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit :
> > > > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I propose Apache ActiveMQ Classic 6.2.0 to your vote.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This is a new major milestone for ActiveMQ Classic bringing
> > about 200
> > > > > > > > fixes and improvements, like:
> > > > > > > > - several fixes and improvements on KahaDB
> > > > > > > > - several fixes and improvements on the client and openwire
> > > > > > > > - several improvements on the Web Console
> > > > > > > > - a fix on the runtime config plugin (about network connector
> > > > > ordering)
> > > > > > > > - performance improvements
> > > > > > > > - A bunch of dependency updates, especially Spring 6.2.12,
> > Jetty
> > > > > > > > 11.0.26, Shiro 2.0.6, Camel 4.14.2, Jackson 2.20.1, Jolokia
> > 2.4.0 and
> > > > > > > > more
> > > > > > > > - and much much more :)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You can take a look on the Release Notes for details:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12311210&version=12354379
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Staging Maven Repository:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheactivemq-1443/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Staging Dist Repository:
> > > > > > > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/activemq/activemq/6.2.0/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Git tag:
> > > > > > > > activemq-6.2.0
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Please vote to approve this release:
> > > > > > > > [ ] +1 Approve the release
> > > > > > > > [ ] 0 I don't care
> > > > > > > > [ ] -1 Don't approve the release (please provide specific
> > comment)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 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
> >
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to