Re: [DISCUSSION] ActiveMQ 5.x roadmap, codename ActiveMQ Missus
Hi JB, I think it make a lot of sense to focus on this points and I will be more than happy to contribute! There is a very large community of users around the ActiveMQ 5.x and it's still very widely use in production environment. I'm not sure that the users actually understand the difference between ActiveMQ 5.x and Artemis, and why Artemis will became ActiveMQ 6.x. If ActiveMQ 5.x still has a long life, I think that the community should be clear about the 2 projects name. regards, François fpa...@apache.org Le 18/06/2019 à 19:44, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit : > Hi all, > > I would like to discuss with you about the ActiveMQ 5.x roadmap. > > Even if Artemis is there, the stack is different and we still have lot > of users on ActiveMQ, and, as a ActiveMQ 5.x fan and contributor, I > think it's worth to give a new "dimension" to ActiveMQ 5.x. > > As all Apache projects, ActiveMQ 5.x roadmap and use is driven by the > community, so I would like to propose and share some ideas with the > ActiveMQ community. > > I already imagine a new codename for ActiveMQ 5.x roadmap: ActiveMQ Missus. > > Basically, I would like to propose a roadmap around three major points: > > 1. Modularity > Today, ActiveMQ 5.x is a monolythic broker, even if most of the parts > are already well isolated (persistent stores, transport connectors, > etc). It makes sense to have some more "modular" and micro-services > oriented, why not leveraging Apache Karaf with services. > > 2. Configuration backends > We currently use Spring beans XML as main configuration backend (or > blueprint in Karaf). I think it makes sense to update and split the > configuration backend with something more "pluggable", and be able to > expose new configuration format like yml. > > 3. Protocol/API update > I would like to add support of JMS 2.0 in ActiveMQ 5.x and check/update > the other protocols/APIs. > > 4. Cloud friendly > I already sent some ideas weeks ago about "cloud friendly features" in > ActiveMQ 5.x. > Basically, I would like to propose: > - a replicated/distributed persistent store to be able to have several > brokers running with a distributed store. I'm testing an update to > KahaDB using Bookkeeper. > - provide new discovery agents with support of Kubernetes, Hazelcast, ... > > I would love to hear the community about this ! ;) > I'm planning to start a complete document to provide more details and > "milestone". > > Thoughts ? > > Regards > JB
Re: [DISCUSSION] ActiveMQ 5.x roadmap, codename ActiveMQ Missus
So I will preface this by saying hopefully my comments are not taken the wrong way and turn into a big fight but instead can lead to a productive discussion about the next steps. First, I'm certainly not opposed to anyone who wants to work on modernizing and adding features to existing software. It is after all community driven so if there are people willing to do the work then go for it. I myself am a heavy user still of 5.x and some of those features could be useful and intriguing if they were ultimately implemented. They are quite major features so it would require a lot of people/work to actually make it a reality. However...The main focus has generally been to maintain 5.x (bug fixes, small features etc) and keep it around but to work on modernizing AMQ by going with Artemis as the next generation. There's been work to add feature parity (still on going) in order to promote it as the future broker that people would move to when ready. Our new website even describes Artemis as the next generation etc with the intention for people to ultimately migrate. My primary concern here is that putting resources and effort into a major upgrade of 5.x will just create further divide in the AMQ community and you will just end up with one faction focused on 5.x and one on Artemis and divide up resources vs putting resources towards one ultimate broker. I think that in this scenario it would be somewhat counterproductive to be essentially competing against ourselves with 2 brokers working to be modernized under the same project (not to mention confusing for users). So personally I think it would be more beneficial if the community would work towards one future broker (Artemis) to improve it vs trying to modernize 2 brokers. Why not take the effort that would be put towards modernizing 5.x into Artemis instead so we have 1 ultimate next generation broker? However, again, this is community driven so if there's enough support to modernize 5.x then it certainly can be done. But that leads me to a discussion that I have been hesitant to bring up but is this...if there is enough support to want to go with 5.x modernization and put significant resources towards it then I feel like it might finally be time to split up the community and have AMQ and Artemis go their separate ways so they each can thrive in their own environment and not have to deal with competing groups stepping on each other. On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 11:44 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi all, > > I would like to discuss with you about the ActiveMQ 5.x roadmap. > > Even if Artemis is there, the stack is different and we still have lot > of users on ActiveMQ, and, as a ActiveMQ 5.x fan and contributor, I > think it's worth to give a new "dimension" to ActiveMQ 5.x. > > As all Apache projects, ActiveMQ 5.x roadmap and use is driven by the > community, so I would like to propose and share some ideas with the > ActiveMQ community. > > I already imagine a new codename for ActiveMQ 5.x roadmap: ActiveMQ Missus. > > Basically, I would like to propose a roadmap around three major points: > > 1. Modularity > Today, ActiveMQ 5.x is a monolythic broker, even if most of the parts > are already well isolated (persistent stores, transport connectors, > etc). It makes sense to have some more "modular" and micro-services > oriented, why not leveraging Apache Karaf with services. > > 2. Configuration backends > We currently use Spring beans XML as main configuration backend (or > blueprint in Karaf). I think it makes sense to update and split the > configuration backend with something more "pluggable", and be able to > expose new configuration format like yml. > > 3. Protocol/API update > I would like to add support of JMS 2.0 in ActiveMQ 5.x and check/update > the other protocols/APIs. > > 4. Cloud friendly > I already sent some ideas weeks ago about "cloud friendly features" in > ActiveMQ 5.x. > Basically, I would like to propose: > - a replicated/distributed persistent store to be able to have several > brokers running with a distributed store. I'm testing an update to > KahaDB using Bookkeeper. > - provide new discovery agents with support of Kubernetes, Hazelcast, ... > > I would love to hear the community about this ! ;) > I'm planning to start a complete document to provide more details and > "milestone". > > Thoughts ? > > Regards > JB > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > jbono...@apache.org > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com >
Re: [HEADS-UP] NMS API Release 1.8.0
>From what I looked, all you need to do is to follow apache release process: http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html and have the signatures... However, the binary distribution generation seems to be using nant. I believe there are better ways to do it currently. as far as I know the .NET framework has evolved a lot since them and there are better ways to do this now. Only question I have is how these binaries were signed before? Manually? I couldn't find any scripting to the signatures. On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 2:51 AM wrote: > > Hi Tim or Jim > > > > > Just want to nudge this so you have a chance to respond. > > > > > Best > > > Mike > > > > > Get Outlook for Android > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 9:48 AM +0100, > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > I am looking to run 1.8.0 release of the API which simply adds netstandard2.0 > build. > > > > > @Jim Gomes or @Timothy Bish, i realise you both historically have run > releases. > > > > > Could i ask for some assistance in my first time releasing .net to ensure i > sign correctly and release inline with how you've done this before? > > > > > Best > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > Get Outlook for Android > > > > > > > > -- Clebert Suconic
Re: [HEADS UP] ActiveMQ 5.15.10 release preparation
Thanks Christopher, I will ping you if needed ! Regards JB On 18/06/2019 18:48, Christopher Shannon wrote: > Thanks Jean-Baptiste. If you need some help (or have issues) with the > 5.15.10 release let me know as I have done the last several as you probably > know. > > Also having JDK 11/12 support will be great and we can finally release > 5.16.0 > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 4:27 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré > wrote: > >> By the way, once 5.15.10 will be released (hopefully beginning of next >> week), I will focus on 5.16.0, especially with JDK 11/12 full support. >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> On 13/06/2019 14:53, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >>> Hi guys, >>> >>> some days ago, I proposed to move forward on ActiveMQ 5.15.10. >>> >>> I've started the preparation aka: >>> 1. reviewing PRs >>> 2. reviewing Jira >>> 3. preparing some improvements/fixes on local branches >>> >>> I made good progress, and I'm working on some OSGi/Karaf improvements. >>> >>> Unfortunately, it took more time than I expected. >>> >>> So, just to let you know that I'm focus on 5.15.10 release preparation >>> but I need some more days (probably about 5 more days). >>> >>> If you have some specific Jira or fixes you want to see in 5.15.10, >>> please ping me directly. >>> >>> Thanks ! >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >> >> -- >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> jbono...@apache.org >> http://blog.nanthrax.net >> Talend - http://www.talend.com >> > -- Jean-Baptiste Onofré jbono...@apache.org http://blog.nanthrax.net Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: [HEADS UP] ActiveMQ 5.15.10 release preparation
Thanks Jean-Baptiste. If you need some help (or have issues) with the 5.15.10 release let me know as I have done the last several as you probably know. Also having JDK 11/12 support will be great and we can finally release 5.16.0 On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 4:27 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > By the way, once 5.15.10 will be released (hopefully beginning of next > week), I will focus on 5.16.0, especially with JDK 11/12 full support. > > Regards > JB > > On 13/06/2019 14:53, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > some days ago, I proposed to move forward on ActiveMQ 5.15.10. > > > > I've started the preparation aka: > > 1. reviewing PRs > > 2. reviewing Jira > > 3. preparing some improvements/fixes on local branches > > > > I made good progress, and I'm working on some OSGi/Karaf improvements. > > > > Unfortunately, it took more time than I expected. > > > > So, just to let you know that I'm focus on 5.15.10 release preparation > > but I need some more days (probably about 5 more days). > > > > If you have some specific Jira or fixes you want to see in 5.15.10, > > please ping me directly. > > > > Thanks ! > > Regards > > JB > > > > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > jbono...@apache.org > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com >
[DISCUSSION] ActiveMQ 5.x roadmap, codename ActiveMQ Missus
Hi all, I would like to discuss with you about the ActiveMQ 5.x roadmap. Even if Artemis is there, the stack is different and we still have lot of users on ActiveMQ, and, as a ActiveMQ 5.x fan and contributor, I think it's worth to give a new "dimension" to ActiveMQ 5.x. As all Apache projects, ActiveMQ 5.x roadmap and use is driven by the community, so I would like to propose and share some ideas with the ActiveMQ community. I already imagine a new codename for ActiveMQ 5.x roadmap: ActiveMQ Missus. Basically, I would like to propose a roadmap around three major points: 1. Modularity Today, ActiveMQ 5.x is a monolythic broker, even if most of the parts are already well isolated (persistent stores, transport connectors, etc). It makes sense to have some more "modular" and micro-services oriented, why not leveraging Apache Karaf with services. 2. Configuration backends We currently use Spring beans XML as main configuration backend (or blueprint in Karaf). I think it makes sense to update and split the configuration backend with something more "pluggable", and be able to expose new configuration format like yml. 3. Protocol/API update I would like to add support of JMS 2.0 in ActiveMQ 5.x and check/update the other protocols/APIs. 4. Cloud friendly I already sent some ideas weeks ago about "cloud friendly features" in ActiveMQ 5.x. Basically, I would like to propose: - a replicated/distributed persistent store to be able to have several brokers running with a distributed store. I'm testing an update to KahaDB using Bookkeeper. - provide new discovery agents with support of Kubernetes, Hazelcast, ... I would love to hear the community about this ! ;) I'm planning to start a complete document to provide more details and "milestone". Thoughts ? Regards JB -- Jean-Baptiste Onofré jbono...@apache.org http://blog.nanthrax.net Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: dist area clean up needed for old releases
Thanks to Tim for clearing these old files out. On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 at 17:29, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > Are you able to get to this Jean-Baptiste? > > If not, perhaps another PMC member can run the commands instead > (examples below)? > > Thanks, > Robbie > > On Thu, 23 May 2019 at 18:12, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > > > Great, thanks Jean-Baptiste. > > > > Robbie > > > > On Thu, 23 May 2019 at 18:06, Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > wrote: > > > > > > I will thanks. > > > > > > Le 23 mai 2019 à 19:05, à 19:05, Robbie Gemmell > > > a écrit: > > > >I have now updated the links on the 5.14.5 release page to point to > > > >the archive. Can a PMC member clean it from the dist area please? > > > > > > > >That could be accomplished by running e.g: > > > >svn rm -m "clean out old release from mirrors" > > > >https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/activemq/5.14.5/ > > > > > > > > > > > >Similarly, I think the apollo subdir of the dist area could be > > > >removed. There are no releases in it anymore, it holds only a KEYS > > > >file which isnt mirrored, isnt linked to from the site anymore, is > > > >archived alongside the releases, and has contents duplicated in the > > > >main KEYS file already. > > > > > > > >That could be accomplished by running e.g: > > > >svn rm -m "remove apollo release subdir" > > > >https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/activemq/activemq-apollo/ > > > > > > > >Thanks, > > > >Robbie > > > > > > > >On Wed, 22 May 2019 at 16:09, Robbie Gemmell > > > >wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Thanks for cleaning up the Apollo and Artemis bits Clebert (Artemis > > > >> 2.7.0 can now go too, and 2.8.0 once 2.8.1 is on the site and > > > >> announced). > > > >> > > > >> For ActiveMQ 5.14.5, I wouldnt consider it an active branch given its > > > >> age, the non trivial number of 5.15.x releases done since then > > > >without > > > >> any new 5.14.x, and multiple security fixes in 5.15.x that were not > > > >> backported. Noone has replied to suggest otherwise, so unless someone > > > >> does I will proceed to update the 5.14.5 release page on the website > > > >> tomorrow to point to the archive area, then ask again that a PMC > > > >> member clears it from the dist area. > > > >> > > > >> Robbie > > > >> > > > >> On Fri, 10 May 2019 at 20:27, Clebert Suconic > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > I have cross referenced with the other post about docs... I thought > > > >I > > > >> > was answering that post. > > > >> > > > > >> > However, since I accidentally promised it :) I am doing the cleanup > > > >> > > > > >> > Artemis: > > > >> > Deleting 1.5.6 > > > >> > Deleting 2.6.1 > > > >> > Deleting 2.6.2 > > > >> > Deleting 2.6.3 > > > >> > Deleting 2.6.4 > > > >> > (2.7.0 will go after I send the announcement.. working on it.. I > > > >had a > > > >> > few issues on updating the website) > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Apollo: > > > >> > Removed > > > >> > > > > >> > NMS: > > > >> > Is it ok to remove 1.5.0? (I'm not sure if these two are active > > > >branches) > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > for ActiveMQ: > > > >> > > > > >> > should I remove 5.14.5? I'm not sure if 5.14 is an active branch or > > > >not. > > > >> > > > > >> > On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 1:55 PM Robbie Gemmell > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Great, thanks Clebert. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Robbie > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Fri, 10 May 2019 at 01:10, Clebert Suconic > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > Ok. Thanks a lot to contribute to the discussion. That’s > > > >sensible. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > I will remove some older versions. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 6:43 AM Robbie Gemmell > > > > > > > >> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > I noticed there are various older releases in the dist area > > > >being > > > >> > > > > mirrored that either definitely or probably should not be any > > > >longer. > > > >> > > > > Could PMC members clean them up as appropriate please? > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Apollo 1.7.1 is still being mirrored, it seems like it should > > > >not be > > > >> > > > > since its deprecated and isnt listed on the new site at all > > > >that I > > > >> > > > > see. > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > For Artemis, 1.5.6, 2.6.1, 2.6.2, 2.6.3, and 2.6.4 are still > > > >being > > > >> > > > > mirrored and shouldn't be, they aren't mentioned on the main > > > >download > > > >> > > > > page for Artemis (2.7.0 is, presumably to become 2.8.0 later > > > >today), > > > >> > > > > and the past releases page links to the archive as would be > > > >expected > > > >> > > > > and not the mirrors. (2.7.0 should also be removed from > > > >mirroring > > > >> > > > > later after the download pages are updated for 2.8.0, which > > > >is now > > > >> > > > > mostly mirrored.) > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > For the 5.x releases, 5.14.5 is still being mirrored but > > > >perhaps > > > >> > > > > should not be. The main download page for 5.x only ment
Re: [HEADS UP] ActiveMQ 5.15.10 release preparation
By the way, once 5.15.10 will be released (hopefully beginning of next week), I will focus on 5.16.0, especially with JDK 11/12 full support. Regards JB On 13/06/2019 14:53, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi guys, > > some days ago, I proposed to move forward on ActiveMQ 5.15.10. > > I've started the preparation aka: > 1. reviewing PRs > 2. reviewing Jira > 3. preparing some improvements/fixes on local branches > > I made good progress, and I'm working on some OSGi/Karaf improvements. > > Unfortunately, it took more time than I expected. > > So, just to let you know that I'm focus on 5.15.10 release preparation > but I need some more days (probably about 5 more days). > > If you have some specific Jira or fixes you want to see in 5.15.10, > please ping me directly. > > Thanks ! > Regards > JB > -- Jean-Baptiste Onofré jbono...@apache.org http://blog.nanthrax.net Talend - http://www.talend.com
