[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #690: Amqp hard soft limits

Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/690 This is ready to merge IMO. Tests are good. Only thing missing is.. I don't see a JIRA-id on any of these commits? shoulnd't that be added here? --- If your project is set

[GitHub] activemq pull request #195: Activemq 5.11.x

GitHub user sundarmr opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/activemq/pull/195 Activemq 5.11.x You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/apache/activemq activemq-5.11.x Alternatively you can review and apply

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ 5.14.0

+1 (non-binding) I gave things a check out by doing the following: - Verified the signatures. - Checked for licence + notice files being present. - Ran the source build (only, no tests). - Started the broker from the tar.gz binary, ran some AMQP client examples against it. - Used the staged maven

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #632: ARTEMIS-604 - Message Serialization Improvement

Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/632 (i had to edit my last comment, I confused Stomp with JORAM :P )... Adding this note here in case you are reading the updates through email. --- If your project is set up for it,

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #632: ARTEMIS-604 - Message Serialization Improvement

Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/632 The tests individually will pass because you would be using Core over Stomp. The Stomp over AMQP test will need to use the factories. You would need to change some

Re: Artemis - Two clusters and one udp group ip:port

Each *cluster* should ideally use the same UDP address and port. If that's not possible then I see two options: 1) Specify a unique cluster user and password for each cluster. The nodes from the different clusters will still attempt to cluster with each other since they will be able to

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #701: ARTEMIS-592 finer-grained security for queues

Github user jbertram commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/701 There's no way to eliminate the user's need to understand how non-core protocols map to the core implementation. We have addresses and queues and just about all the configuration and

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #701: ARTEMIS-592 finer-grained security for queues

Github user mtaylor commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/701 @clebertsuconic sure, I think that similar feature is virtual topics, which solve the same problem as shared subscriptions. The way it works in ActiveMQ 5.x is that the user specifies the

Re: Artemis - Two clusters and one udp group ip:port

Hi, Thanks for the reply. As per my understanding, specifying the user/password for the cluster doesn't allow a client to differentiate between clusters on the same udp address. It gives cluster the power to permit other nodes whether to get connection to that cluster or not. May be I am wrong.

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #701: ARTEMIS-592 finer-grained security for queues

Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/701 My understanding was. There was a similar feature in AMQ5 that needed to be similar here in which Lionel was using.if there is a way to not use the queue name it's better for sure.

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #701: ARTEMIS-592 finer-grained security for queues

Github user mtaylor commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/701 Also, I think this JIRA is only relevant when used in a shared subscription scenario. See Lionel's comment about CERN's use case. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #701: ARTEMIS-592 finer-grained security for queues

Github user mtaylor commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/701 This JIRA title is: Allow fine grain access control (durable subscriptions). There is some discussion on the JIRA that you might find useful. --- If your project is set up for it, you

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #701: ARTEMIS-592 finer-grained security for queues

Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/701 The task is about using he queue name also on the control. So it has to do so by definition right? Unless you close the Jira as won't fix. --- If your project is set up for it,

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #632: ARTEMIS-604 - Message Serialization Improvement

Github user gaohoward commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/632 I can see the 2 failure in my local env (individual test run will pass, they only show up in batch tests). I'm investigating now. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ 5.14.0

Yep absolutely! On Aug 4, 2016 08:14, "Christopher Shannon" wrote: > Thanks for the feedback and PRs. Some of that stuff (readme, etc) is > pretty old and hasn't been touched in years so we can fix it up for the > next release. > > On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 7:39

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ 5.14.0

Thanks for the feedback and PRs. Some of that stuff (readme, etc) is pretty old and hasn't been touched in years so we can fix it up for the next release. On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 7:39 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > Oh and your NOTICE says 2015. > > I've raised a PR for the

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ 5.14.0

Oh and your NOTICE says 2015. I've raised a PR for the two simpler things, I can look at the DEP file as well. On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 7:04 AM John D. Ament wrote: > +1 release contents look good. A couple of nitpicks: > > - Sign the release with your apache.org email >

[GitHub] activemq pull request #194: Renamed README file. Updated link for encryption...

GitHub user johnament opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/activemq/pull/194 Renamed README file. Updated link for encryption and location of LICENSE. Formatting looks better IMHO, if you want to take a look: https://github.com/johnament/activemq/blob/master/README.md

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ 5.14.0

+1 release contents look good. A couple of nitpicks: - Sign the release with your apache.org email - You may want to verify your signature, get this warning when verifying it: gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! gpg: There is no indication that the

[GitHub] activemq-artemis pull request #702: ARTEMIS-604 - Message Serialization Impr...

Github user gaohoward closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/702 --- 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

[GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #702: ARTEMIS-604 - Message Serialization Improvement

Github user gaohoward commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/702 I'm closing it as duplicated PR. --- 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