If we couple that with JDK 25, ActiveMQ 7 makes sense. Regards JB
On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 8:24 PM Matt Pavlovich <[email protected]> wrote: > I think Jetty 12 to 12.1 won’t be too complicated. > > I think we need to get the Jetty 12 upgrade merged (the blocker is web > console EL templating isn’t working yet) into 6.3.x. > > Might be good to go ahead and call it ActiveMQ 7 w/ Spring 7 and EE 11— > effectively mark ActiveMQ 6.x as the transition to more stable > JDK/Spring/EE alignment going forward. > > -Matt > > > On Mar 20, 2026, at 11:17 AM, Christopher Shannon < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > One thing to be aware of is that Spring 7.x requires EE 11. So it would > > require both upgrading to Jetty 12.1.x (not Jetty 12.0.x) as well as > > Jakarta EE 11 and I think we might only be using EE 9 right now. > > > > I'm not sure what issues might arise from bumping to EE 11, maybe none as > > long as we don't use the new features. > > > > Spring 6.2.x is EOL in 3 months so it probably makes sense but something > to > > be aware of. > > > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 10:34 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi folks, > >> > >> For the coming ActiveMQ 6.4.0 release, I propose to upgrade to Spring > 7.x. > >> > >> Spring 7.x is still compatible with JDK 17 but also has better support > for > >> JDK 25. > >> > >> The reason why I'm proposing ActiveMQ 6.4.x is because Spring 7.x would > >> require Jetty 12.x. > >> Matt started the Jetty 12.x update, so we have a dependency to this > work to > >> have a clean Spring 7.x upgrade. > >> > >> I will chat with Matt if he needs help on the Jetty 12.x update. > >> > >> Are you ok to plan Spring 7.x update for ActiveMQ 6.4.0 ? > >> > >> Regards > >> JB > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact > > >
