Hi Christopher,
OK, so, I will move forward on 5.16.0 with JDK11 support at runtime.
I will focus on JDK11 build + LevelDB cleanup + other
cleanup/refactoring for 5.17.0.
So, let me move forward on 5.16.0 as it's now ready ;)
Regards
JB
On 28/01/2020 20:22, Christopher Shannon wrote:
> We
> On Jan 28, 2020, at 1:22 PM, Christopher Shannon
> wrote:
>
> We definitely do not want to remove JDK 8 support for 5.16.0 so my vote is
> for option 1. I think it's fine if we build with JDK 8 as long as it
> supports JDK 8 - 11 at runtime.
>
> For 5.17.0 we can work on building with
Hey JBO-
Thanks for your efforts on this. I’d like to see a JDK 11 runtime. No
preference 5.16.x v 5.17.x.
-Matt
> On Jan 28, 2020, at 6:57 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I would like to move forward on ActiveMQ releases:
>
> - ActiveMQ 5.15.12
> I'm preparing several
On 1/28/20 2:22 PM, Christopher Shannon wrote:
We definitely do not want to remove JDK 8 support for 5.16.0 so my vote is
for option 1. I think it's fine if we build with JDK 8 as long as it
supports JDK 8 - 11 at runtime.
For 5.17.0 we can work on building with JDK 11. For one thing I think
We definitely do not want to remove JDK 8 support for 5.16.0 so my vote is
for option 1. I think it's fine if we build with JDK 8 as long as it
supports JDK 8 - 11 at runtime.
For 5.17.0 we can work on building with JDK 11. For one thing I think we
should just make it easier on ourselves and
Hi guys,
I would like to move forward on ActiveMQ releases:
- ActiveMQ 5.15.12
I'm preparing several dependency updates and important fixes on the
activemq-5.15.x branch. It includes some security fixes, postgresql jdbc
store performance improvements, ...
I have some PRs under review and on the
