+1
-dain
On Apr 9, 2015, at 6:06 AM, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code is not ready to become ActiveMQ 6. We can figure out what the
code name should be
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5155?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14487704#comment-14487704
]
Chad Kelly commented on AMQ-5155:
-
You are correct, using /topic/test works as expected. I
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5155?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14487669#comment-14487669
]
Chad Kelly commented on AMQ-5155:
-
Even though the above bug was fixed, a related bug now
+1
david jencks
On Apr 9, 2015, at 9:06 AM, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of
Thanks for the explanation. That helps.
So, I guess we could discuss the merits of keeping the Board Reports on our
wiki, as it does seem somewhat redundant. As long as they exist on the
wiki, it would be helpful to have a better indexing system.
Perhaps Hiram can offer background as to the
Your proposal sounds good to me.
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Jim Gomes e.se...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks, Tim. That is a clear and compelling reason to keep them there.
With that clarified, does anyone have any comments on the renaming of the
pages to improve the indexing?
Best,
Jim
+1
(Please pardon my reference to Buddhism here)
In buddhist practice, we remind ourselves of many things every time we
practice. One of those is stated this way, forgive me for divisive
actions, and, I promise to avoid divisive actions. We all do it, whether
with intent or not, but in the
GitHub user mtaylor opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-6/pull/202
Add Auto JMS queue creation for OpenWire
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/mtaylor/activemq-6 autoQueueCreationOpenWire
Thanks, Tim. That is a clear and compelling reason to keep them there.
With that clarified, does anyone have any comments on the renaming of the
pages to improve the indexing?
Best,
Jim
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Timothy Bish tabish...@gmail.com wrote:
On 04/09/2015 02:13 PM, Jim Gomes
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5716?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michal Kubricht updated AMQ-5716:
-
Affects Version/s: 5.10.2
5.11.1
TopicSubscription gets into endless loop
It is a good name. Do we need to engage trademarks@ for code names?
On Thursday, April 9, 2015, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com wrote:
I do like Artemis. ActiveMQ Artemis has a nice ring to it.
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Christian Posta
christian.po...@gmail.com javascript:;
Nope.
On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 09:18:28AM -0400, James Carman wrote:
It is a good name. Do we need to engage trademarks@ for code names?
On Thursday, April 9, 2015, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com wrote:
I do like Artemis. ActiveMQ Artemis has a nice ring to it.
On Wed, Apr 8,
+1
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 6:06 AM, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com
wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5155?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14487682#comment-14487682
]
Timothy Bish commented on AMQ-5155:
---
This is not a bug, the default address string in
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5716?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14488328#comment-14488328
]
Timothy Bish commented on AMQ-5716:
---
This seems valid to me after review. It'd be nice to
No “objection”, but why don’t we just delete the page and point at the official
records:
https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/ActiveMQ.html
Dan
On Apr 9, 2015, at 12:35 PM, Jim Gomes jgo...@apache.org wrote:
I recently went out to look at previous Board Reports (
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5665?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Dejan Bosanac resolved AMQ-5665.
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 5.12.0
Assignee: Dejan Bosanac
I ran into this
+1
Hiram Chirino mailto:hi...@hiramchirino.com
9 April 2015 14:06
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code is not ready to
2015-04-09 3:59 GMT+02:00 James Carman ja...@carmanconsulting.com:
I am trying to understand the picture that has been painted for us thus
far. Maybe you can help me. First of all, the argument for why we need to
start from the HornetQ code base is because the current core broker is in
such
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5715?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Antoine Wils updated AMQ-5715:
--
Description:
decryption of password not working when using wrapper to start ActiveMQ.
The wrapper
Antoine Wils created AMQ-5715:
-
Summary: ActiveMQ cannot load decryption password from environment
variable
Key: AMQ-5715
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5715
Project: ActiveMQ
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-6/pull/203
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
Michal Kubricht created AMQ-5716:
Summary: TopicSubscription gets into endless loop when memory
limit reached
Key: AMQ-5716
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5716
Project: ActiveMQ
renaming makes sense to me.
On 9 Apr 2015 19:44, Jim Gomes e.se...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks, Tim. That is a clear and compelling reason to keep them there.
With that clarified, does anyone have any comments on the renaming of the
pages to improve the indexing?
Best,
Jim
On Thu, Apr 9,
I recently went out to look at previous Board Reports (
http://activemq.apache.org/apache-activemq-board-reports.html) and found
the current sorting method difficult to deal with. Unless we are required
to use the page naming format, I would like to change it to the following
format:
Apache
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5715?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Antoine Wils updated AMQ-5715:
--
Attachment: activemq.patch
attaching patch
ActiveMQ cannot load decryption password from environment
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5155?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14487732#comment-14487732
]
Timothy Bish commented on AMQ-5155:
---
Keep testing it and report back if you find any other
+1
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-6/pull/202
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
+1
- Original Message -
From: Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com
To: ActiveMQ-Developers dev@activemq.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2015 8:06:16 AM
Subject: [VOTE] HornetQ Code Donation should use a codename
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the
+1
On Apr 9, 2015 9:06 AM, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code is not
GitHub user clebertsuconic opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-6/pull/203
few changes I found when debugging the testsuite
I was looking for why the testsuite was broken, and I found these in the
process
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository
Thanks for the feedback, everyone. It looks like there's no technical
reason for the current naming scheme. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't
breaking some kind of formatting requirement from the Board.
I'll get them fixed up shortly.
Best,
Jim
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Gary Tully
In addition does HA imply redundancy on both storage(messages are duplicated
across nodes) as well as connectivity(if a node goes down one would still be
able to post to another)
--
View this message in context:
+1
On 9 Apr 2015 14:06, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code is not ready
On Apr 9, 2015, at 1:02 PM, Jim Gomes jgo...@apache.org wrote:
Thanks for the link, Dan. I didn't know those were there. I think the main
difference here is that link is to the Board Minutes, whereas the ActiveMQ
wiki has the Board Report. They seem to be identical, but will they always
On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 08:51:31AM +0200, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
2015-04-09 3:59 GMT+02:00 James Carman ja...@carmanconsulting.com:
I am trying to understand the picture that has been painted for us thus
far. Maybe you can help me. First of all, the argument for why we need to
start
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5716?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14488325#comment-14488325
]
Timothy Bish commented on AMQ-5716:
---
Some work in this area already for related issue.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5716?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michal Kubricht updated AMQ-5716:
-
Attachment: TopicSubscriptionTest.java
junit_amq_5716.patch
Well,
I've stopped working on apollo since the community aspects of it did
not seem to be getting much traction. If your using it and find any
problems with it, please send in patches :) You part of solving the
community problem and help maintain and push apollo forward.
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at
Justin Bertram created ACTIVEMQ6-96:
---
Summary: Implement administrative limit for the maximum client
connections allowed
Key: ACTIVEMQ6-96
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACTIVEMQ6-96
Thanks for the link, Dan. I didn't know those were there. I think the main
difference here is that link is to the Board Minutes, whereas the ActiveMQ
wiki has the Board Report. They seem to be identical, but will they always
be? And even if they are identical, do we still need to have the
On 04/09/2015 09:06 AM, Hiram Chirino wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code is not ready to become ActiveMQ 6.
On 04/09/2015 02:13 PM, Jim Gomes wrote:
Thanks for the explanation. That helps.
So, I guess we could discuss the merits of keeping the Board Reports on our
wiki, as it does seem somewhat redundant. As long as they exist on the
wiki, it would be helpful to have a better indexing system.
I am new to activemq. We are prototyping a few queuing frameworks.
2 Of the things we require is High Availability and journaling.
I understand that you can get HA with the Master/slave setup. Would this
also guarantee durability. ie no messages that has been posted will be lost?
Another thing
+1
On 09/04/15 14:06, Hiram Chirino wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code is not ready to become ActiveMQ 6. We
I do like Artemis. ActiveMQ Artemis has a nice ring to it.
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Christian Posta
christian.po...@gmail.com wrote:
Nice, Dan! ArtemisMQ! I like it.
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org wrote:
On Apr 8, 2015, at 4:23 PM, Hiram Chirino
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5716?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michal Kubricht updated AMQ-5716:
-
Description:
I might be wrong, but I think that there is a mistake in
{{FilePendingMessageCursor}}
+1
On Apr 9, 2015 7:25 AM, Clebert Suconic clebert.suco...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com
wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as
I tested many brokers and am very impressed with the performance
characteristics of Apollo. I work for a large company and the broker is
going to be the backbone of a large infrastructure project.
The issue is that while Apollo does well in my tests, its future seems
uncertain. Especially being
51 matches
Mail list logo
