Hi JB, Following up on the Github Actions item.
I did follow the various recent attempts. I think the current configuration is looking good and the IO on Github seems to be way better than the Jenkins nodes at Apache, resulting in a significant build improvement. It seems that 2 tests are causing random failures ActiveMQJMS2MessageListenerTest: I had similar issues with my PRs and ended up fixing it in one of them. I can probably extract the fix into a separate PR that we can merge more easily and get the benefits in the Github Actions work. RestTest: I'm not quite sure why this web console test is currently failing. I don't know why this happens. I'm wondering if this is due to the build being faster The code does the following // AMQ-9330 - test no 500 error on timeout and instead 204 error > Future<Result> result = > asyncRequest(httpClient, "http://localhost:"; + port + > "/message/test?readTimeout=1000&type=queue&clientId=test", new > StringBuffer()); > // try a second request while the first is running, this should get a 500 > error since the first is still running and > // concurrent access to the same consumer is not allowed > Future<Result> errorResult = asyncRequest(httpClient, "http://localhost:"; + > port + "/message/test?readTimeout=10000&type=queue&clientId=test", new > StringBuffer()); > assertEquals(HttpStatus.INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR_500, > errorResult.get().getResponse().getStatus()); > //After the original request finishes, verify 204 and not 500 error > assertEquals(HttpStatus.NO_CONTENT_204, > result.get().getResponse().getStatus()); > > > And it fails on the first assert 500 because we receive a 204 Did not check the code more, but from the comments, it could happen if the first asyncRequest completes before we get a chance to issue the second and therefore, we would receive 204 for the 2. Thoughts? -- Jean-Louis Monteiro http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro http://www.tomitribe.com On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 5:13 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi folks, > > Now that we have two Top-Level Projects (ActiveMQ and Artemis), I > would like to propose the following action plan across five key areas > for discussion: > > 1. Website > I propose two immediate actions regarding the ActiveMQ website: > a. We should quickly remove the term "Classic" from the project name > and all mentions across the website. > b. I propose an important refactoring of the website structure, > leveraging a modern static site generator such as Antora, Docusaurus, > or Hugo (see Point 2 for related details). > > 2. Documentation > We have a significant amount of work ahead to ensure the documentation > content is current and complete. To facilitate this, I propose > adopting a framework like Hugo to manage documentation across multiple > versions effectively. > > 3. GitHub Issues > I plan to restart the discussion regarding migrating our issue > tracking from Jira to GitHub Issues. This will be initiated in a > separate thread. > > 4. GitHub Actions (CI) > I have started implementing GitHub Actions for our Continuous > Integration (CI) process (as demonstrated in > https://github.com/apache/activemq/pull/1497 > (https://github.com/apache/activemq/pull/1497)). This setup will also > allow us to manage dependency updates automatically via Dependabot. > > 5. Automated Release/ATR > Building upon the work in Point 4, we will be able to transition > toward Automatic Release CI/ATR. This topic will also be discussed in > a separate, dedicated thread. > > I will initiate separate threads for each of these points to allow for > focused discussion. Additionally, I would like to make a call for > contributions for anyone interested in helping with these important > topics. > > 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 > > >
