When is G gonna upgrade to AMQ 5?
--jason
On Mar 26, 2008, at 12:28 PM, David Jencks wrote:
On Mar 25, 2008, at 7:41 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
Yep, I'd like to see those fixes in 2.1.1, but maybe an ActiveMQ
4.1.2 release that still supports Java 1.4 for existing stand-alone
ActiveMQ users would be the best way to go for now.
I didn't really consider moving to java 5 (which involves only
replacing the backport-concurrent classes with the
java.util.concurrent classes) until I picked up the activeio-3.1-
SNAPSHOT fix which has already moved definitively to java 5. So I
have no problem calling the activemq version 4.2 but keeping a java
1.4 compatibility for activemq won't let you use it on java 1.4 due
to the activeio changes.
I should have thought of and mentioned this in the original post...
thanks
david jencks
-Donald
Joe Bohn wrote:
David Jencks wrote:
Geronimo is still using ActiveMQ 4 and I've applied patches for
or fixed a few bugs that are fairly important for getting MDBS
working reliably and fixing other problems. So, I'd like to get
a release out of the 4.x branch for the upcoming Geronimo 2.1.1
release.
I agree ... it would be great to get those included in 2.1.1.
I've looked through the jiras for 4.x and applied the patches for
ones that I had a clue about. If anyone else wants something
fixed in 4.x please speak up.
ActiveIO trunk has a fix that we'd like (don't put non-strings in
system properties) so I'd like to release ActiveIO 3.1 also.
Since that requires java 5 I'd like to update activemq 4 to use
java 5 also (I've tried and this is easy to do). What's the
community feeling on this? Is this a real no-no? Would it be
better to have the version 4.2 and preserve 4.1.x for java 1.4
work?
I'm sure others have more informed opinions on this than I do. I
personally can't think of a reason that we should need another
java 1.4 release but it certainly is nice to have the option ...
so I think it would make sense to do the java 5 work in a 4.2
branch. Although I have to admit that I'm getting a little
nervous at all the moving parts for 2.1.1.
I'd like to also update the poms to use more modern maven release
procedures as well.... I haven't looked into this much yet and
will post further when I do.
thanks
david jencks
