Thanks all, I will rename apache/activemq to apache/activemq-classic.
Regards
JB
On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 3:57 PM Justin Bertram wrote:
>
> This weekend JB announced [1] the availability of official Docker images
> for ActiveMQ "Classic" in the "apache/activemq" namespace [2].
>
> Perhaps I
+1
On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 8:45 PM Matt Pavlovich wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> > On Jul 10, 2023, at 9:45 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Justin,
> >
> > It has been discussed but not the name specifically.
> >
> > As we use apache/activemq-artemis, I thought "logical" to use
> >
+1 (non-binding)
> On Jul 10, 2023, at 9:45 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>
> Hi Justin,
>
> It has been discussed but not the name specifically.
>
> As we use apache/activemq-artemis, I thought "logical" to use
> apache/activemq (but maybe activemq-classic makes more sense).
>
> I'm not
+1
On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 11:36 AM Domenico Francesco Bruscino
wrote:
>
> +1 for apache/activemq-classic and apache/activemq-artemis
>
> Domenico
>
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2023 at 17:26, Justin Bertram wrote:
>
> > I'm fine with using:
> >
> > - apache/activemq-classic
> > - apache/activemq-artemis
+1 for apache/activemq-classic and apache/activemq-artemis
Domenico
On Mon, 10 Jul 2023 at 17:26, Justin Bertram wrote:
> I'm fine with using:
>
> - apache/activemq-classic
> - apache/activemq-artemis
>
>
> Justin
>
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 9:55 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> wrote:
>
> > Hi
I'm fine with using:
- apache/activemq-classic
- apache/activemq-artemis
Justin
On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 9:55 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré
wrote:
> Hi Justin,
>
> It has been discussed but not the name specifically.
>
> As we use apache/activemq-artemis, I thought "logical" to use
>
I think having an explicit difference is better from a user point of view;
so "classic" and "artemis" must be there somehow.
That being said, at first glance it does not make much difference to me if
we use apache/activemq-classic with apache/activemq-artemis instead of
apache/activemq/classic
Hi Justin,
It has been discussed but not the name specifically.
As we use apache/activemq-artemis, I thought "logical" to use
apache/activemq (but maybe activemq-classic makes more sense).
I'm not sure we will be able to use apache/activemq/classic and
apache/activemq/artemis, but we can
I agree with Justin that sharing the apache/activemq namespace for
both "Classic" and Artemis will cause conflicts and confusion, i.e. the
latest tag now is pointing to Apache ActiveMQ Classic 5.18.2 but when an
Apache ActiveMQ Artemis version will be pushed, it will point to a
container image for
This weekend JB announced [1] the availability of official Docker images
for ActiveMQ "Classic" in the "apache/activemq" namespace [2].
Perhaps I missed it, but I don't recall (and can't find) any discussion of
or notification about this. Users will certainly expect images for both
"Classic" and
10 matches
Mail list logo
