On 04/19/2011 02:31 PM, Alan Conway wrote:
On 04/19/2011 12:26 PM, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
Based on the comments so far it seems that delaying the 0.10 release
is probably a better idea.
I agree with Carl and Steve that erratas can be time consuming and may
actually be detrimental to our overall goals.
For now lets hold on to the release a bit and see what needs to be
done to fix QPID-3214& QPID-3216.
Based on that we can make a call to just release note it and fix it in
0.12 or whether we can safely fix them for 0.10
If we are holding up 0.10 release I'd like to propose these two fixes:
QPID-3215 cached exchange reference can cause cluster inconsistencies if
exchange is deleted/recreated
QPID-3208 Exchanges make best effort to route messages if there is an error.
They are not regressions but both can cause cluster brokers to shut down (and
have for at least one user.) The fixes are low risk and already on the trunk.
I'd like to add this trivial fix:
QPID-3217 Exchanges with IVE option cause cluster inconsistencies in updatees
All 3 are on trunk and have had code review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org
