Re: Guarantee delivery response message to origin producer

Typically, the best way to accomplish request/reply is to use a temporary queue. Like this: - JMS client A creates a temporary queue - JMS client A produces message to request queue - On that message, the temporary queue is set as the JMSReplyTo using javax.jms.Message.setJMSReplyTo() - JMS

Re: Artemis Roadmap

Thanks Bruce - I will look at this page shortly - I hope this week, but should be no later than the end of next week. Art -- Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html

Re: [DISCUSS] Video call on ActiveMQ Artemis

+1 Count me in. Hope I can make it. -- Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Artemis as TLP

I don't know about you guys - but I often feel like I'm arguing with myself in an echo chamber when trying to find a way to move these discussions forward. :-) -- Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html

Re: [DISCUSS] Move PR discussions to another list...

For all the folks arguing that change is not needed - let me ask a question. Is the concern clear? I thought Clebert's post showing the mailing list did a good job, but we can talk more about the concern. -- Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html

Re: [DISCUSS] Move PR discussions to another list...

I'm putting this out there - hope folks will read it as I found it very helpful. It's not technical... https://www.stephencovey.com/7habits/7habits-habit4.php The numbered list is the most pertinent part IMO. I post it here because I see a trend in the communication that I think this helps to

Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ Artemis becomes ActiveMQ 6

Please don't get too discouraged. My vote personally was a request to slow down and discuss. I'm just not at a point where I'm ready for "ActiveMQ Artemis becomes ActiveMQ 6". We have this cycle of communication in which a vote goes out and generates a ton of discussion (often heated). Then we

Re: [DISCUSS] Move PR discussions to another list...

+1 to Clebert's comments on clarity. -- Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html

Re: [DISCUSS] Move PR discussions to another list...

So any thoughts on how we can make sure important discussions, that deserve the full attention of the PMC, can be achieved? Really, on how we can meet everybody's needs... We've got the following positions, as I see it so far: 1. Keep all DISCUSS and VOTE in public on the DEV list, do NOT

Re: [DISCUSS] Move PR discussions to another list...

+1 Note that the actual list name comes up as "[hidden email]" in this post, so my vote is not for the name itself. With that said, cleaning up the DEV list - so that PRs, commit messages, and other auto-generated git notices do not distract - is most welcome. Art -- Sent from:

Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ Artemis becomes ActiveMQ 6

-1 I think we need to slow down. While the referenced discussion opened the possibility of unifying on a single broker, there's a lot more to discuss before that decision is made. Naming Artemis as ActiveMQ 6 implies to the community that we are deprecating AMQ 5 now. For example, the

Re: [DISCUSS] Removing the Web Console

What is the "rh-messaging project" On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 3:34 PM, MichaelAndrePearce [via ActiveMQ] < ml+s2283324n4728194...@n4.nabble.com> wrote: > Ok, > > So i think we can do this. From a local build. > > Please see screenshots. > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Removing the Web Console

Please catch me up here - are we saying that the Artemis built-in web console will be running HawtIO??? Art On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 7:15 AM, rajdavies [via ActiveMQ] < ml+s2283324n4728199...@n4.nabble.com> wrote: > On the “about” page - it would be polite to reference the hawtio comunity > -

Re: [DISCUSS] Removing the Web Console

I just saw this thread; haven't read the entire history, so I apologize for any misperceptions. Here are some fundamental requirements for the Web Console that I feel strongly must be met: - ActiveMQ must have a built-in web console that requires minimal/no configuration to enable -

Re: [DISCUSS] New logo discussion

Yeah, feels like 1 month is a good start. Perhaps allow it to draw out a longer (not indefinitely) if there's continued, constructive activity. On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 7:37 AM, clebertsuconic [via ActiveMQ] < ml+s2283324n4726567...@n4.nabble.com> wrote: > How long should I keep the submission

Re: Anyone going to JavaOne? Proposed Hackathon

I am in town. Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 14, 2016, at 5:14 PM, John D. Ament-2 [via ActiveMQ] > wrote: > > Hey, > > I know I've been busy the past few weeks. Wondering if anyone else from > ActiveMQ is planning to be at JavaOne next week?

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ 5.13.3 #2

+1 The tests all pass for me now. Very nice. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Apache-ActiveMQ-5-13-3-2-tp4711327p4711414.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ 5.13.3

en working gradually on fixing tests with hard coded ports (a > lot > have been fixed already) but not all of them have been fixed yet. Some of > the network tests are more tricky to not rely on hard code ports. > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 5:12 PM, artnaseef <[hidden email] &

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ 5.13.3

I keep getting the following test failure on the build: > testSuppression(org.apache.activemq.broker.jmx.SelectiveMBeanRegistrationTest) > > Time elapsed: 30.616 sec <<< FAILURE! > java.lang.AssertionError: one sub > at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:88) > at

Links to ActiveMQ Archived Releases?

Today (maybe earlier), http://archive.apache.org was put into maintenance mode, making all of ActiveMQ's archived content unavailable (not to mention others). This means that the download links on all release pages, except the latest one on each of the two maintained branches, fail to download.

Re: ActiveMQ : Integration of C.

Can you provide details of the problems seen? I haven't used ActiveMQ-CPP myself in a while, but I would expect building it from sources on any modern Linux system to work. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Integration-of-C-tp4709951p4710530.html

Re: ActiveMQ 5.13.3 and 5.14.0 release schedule

Yeah, AMQ-6203 should be a big win for a major headache, if the fix eliminates the problem. Please include it in the 5.13.3 release at the very least. Probably a new release of 5.12.x too, unless 5.14.0 comes out in the next couple of weeks. -- View this message in context:

Re: ActiveMQ : Integration of C.

This is an uncommon situation. Here's my thoughts (note that I was a "Unix and C" developer for many years before moving over to Java): 1. Either approach can work 2. Java runs within a virtual machine (the JVM) and is designed that way a. It is great for execution of java applications

Re: Building AMQ 5.13.1 from tag

I wonder if it's timezone-related. There's odd logic in the test looking for 8:50, based on the snippet Jamie posted. Oddly it's using 20 minutes into the epoch as the time, and then somehow expecting a different result if that returns 8 and 50 as follows: if (startHours == 8 &&

Re: [DISCUSS] ActiveMQ {CodeName} Web Console...

I would love to see this console added to the ActiveMQ code base. Whether we move it toward inclusion as a new console is something we can look at going forward. Adding it as a tool available directly from the main broker Jetty page would be great. Playing with AMQC against remote brokers does

Re: Messages between Brokers

There are two approaches I would recommend. First is the "network of brokers," which is the simpler one to setup, but introduces race conditions and caveats (e.g. reduced reliability of temp destination and topic message flow): http://activemq.apache.org/networks-of-brokers.html Second is the

Re: [DISCUSS] OSGi support for Artemis

A simple shell script would work well if we have access to all the directories. Something like this: Or, this is even better: -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-OSGi-support-for-Artemis-tp4703943p4703989.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev

Re: [DISCUSS] OSGi support for Artemis

Here's a script that will nicely list all of the packages with more than one source root followed by the list of roots: Note that for the AMQ source code, it comes up with many things, including (this is partial output): -- View this message in context:

Re: [DISCUSS] OSGi support for Artemis

How much work are we talking to get Artemis properly OSGi-ready? An uber-jar is a work-around. If nothing better can be accomplished, then we may have to live with it in the near-term, but it is important to understand what challenges are driving us toward a work-around. Also, we have an

Re: Compile failure

Personally, I've never seen activemq run into duplicate classes in this way. I'll attempt the build with the same options and see if I can reproduce it locally. Note that the "-fae" option allows us to get all of the tests run even when there is a failure because ActiveMQ has been notorious for

Re: Compatibility of Versions 5.5.1 and 5.6/5.7

Note that 5.6 had a lot of NOB issues. There are ways to bridge the brokers if you only need static routing (i.e. the direction of message flow is fixed). For example, a simple camel route can be used. -- View this message in context:

Re: Compile failure

One question is coming to mind. I see the maven command is running the "clean" command. However, I wonder if the workspace for the build has been wiped clean recently. This commit moved the file from "src/main" to "src/test" 5c6b8ba11f2e77cd7fb6102f7ad0cb759ca26723. That dates back to 2013

Re: Release ActiveMQ 5.11.3....

That's great Daniel. I have nothing outstanding for 5.11.3. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Release-ActiveMQ-5-11-3-tp4703386p4703461.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [DISCUSS] Including Camel in activemq-all

Before the feature to allow camel routes to intercept incoming messages (http://activemq.apache.org/broker-camel-component.html), camel really just depended on ActiveMQ, but ActiveMQ didn't depend on camel. Now with that feature however, it seems like it makes sense to go in that jar file.

Re: [VOTE] Release ActiveMQ-CPP v3.9.0 #2

+1 Thank you Tim. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-ActiveMQ-CPP-v3-9-0-2-tp4700871p4701099.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [DISCUSS] Including Camel in activemq-all

OK, so it sounds like a nice-to-have, but not expected to be an essential part of any production-grade solution. Makes sense. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Including-Camel-in-activemq-all-tp4700996p4701096.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev

Re: [HEADS-UP/Discussion] Artemis: Planning a release soon

My recommendation is to use semantic versioning and stick with it: * x.y.z * z = bug fixes only * y = any new features or changes to existing features * x = any backward compatibility loss in APIs / usage of the product With that said, whatever approach is used, let's make clear guidelines and

Re: Create network of brokers dynamically using java

Is it not possible to use a broker discovery method for this purpose? It should be simple enough to implement the DiscoveryAgent interface and plug it into the brokers. Take a look at DiscoveryNetworkConnector for that approach. To directly add network connectors to a running broker, use one of

Re: Maven dependencies

Yup, looks like a version issue. Also, taking a quick look at [2] in the Ops message, it seems the author there is using the activemq maven plugin as a way to get started quickly with using ActiveMQ. I wouldn't go that route to start with as it can be harder to see what's going on with ActiveMQ.

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ 5.12.0

Whao - that was fast. I just saw the messages this morning announcing plans to release 5.12.0 and now it's already up for a vote? What's the rush? Can we slow this down so folks who have things to contribute to a once-in-six-to-twelve-months release can find time to work on them? -- View

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ 5.12.0

Ah, looking more carefully, that is correct. While I did only see the notice this morning, it's been out there since July 30. I must be mixing 5.11.2 and 5.12 stuff. I have some outstanding improvement work on selector issues, but it needs at least a few more days of work. If we're comfortable

Re: Memory limit reached

Thanks for letting us know - glad you were able to track it down. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Memory-limit-reached-tp4700568p4700738.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Too many updates in MySQL

OK, extracting one SUB_NAME and CLIENT_ID combo, something else looks wrong here: Query,UPDATE ACTIVEMQ_ACKS SET LAST_ACKED_ID=25026\, XID = NULL WHERE CONTAINER='topic://testTopic' AND CLIENT_ID='AP8DA27' AND SUB_NAME='test3' Query,UPDATE ACTIVEMQ_ACKS SET LAST_ACKED_ID=25027\, XID = NULL

Re: Too many updates in MySQL

Actually, it looks like the updates are not storing new information, but simply repeatedly storing the acknowledgement table. I need to review the code to be sure how this works. I believe the ack table is re-written periodically. However, I *may* be thinking of KahaDB logic that does not apply

Re: Memory limit reached

Are transactions in use? Perhaps this is the result of an open transaction. I would need to look more closely at the code to see under what conditions this can happen, and exactly what that queue size 0 means. Another thought - look at the inflight count for the queue and make sure that's zero

Re: [VOTE] ActiveMQ 5.11.2

Hey - I don't expect to find time to test this release before the vote period is up, so here's my vote: +0 @Dan - I had started merging many of the outstanding bug fixes for a 5.10.3 release and identified a list of candidate bugs to back-port to both 5.10.2. Have you seen the list? If not, I

Re: [DISCUSS] enabling svngit2jira integration?

This sounds good to me. Fisheye has always been far too slow in my experience. I take it this will only apply to new commits and no history will be back-filled, right? That's probably a good thing. -- View this message in context:

Re: Please review: Unix Init Script Improvements - strange options export and create

One thought here. There's a lot of complexity and functionality in the existing scripts. Perhaps it would make sense to start a new set of smaller scripts that are more focused on individual tasks. If we want to have a master script so the command-name is the same across multiple functions,

Re: Message Groups and long running transactions

This is an interesting mix of needs. Using message groups to ensure ordered processing of messages while at least some of the messages take excessive periods of time to process. Can the slow-processing messages be separated from the message-groups? Note the default message group handling uses a

AMQ-5695 kahadb files not being cleaned up

Has anyone else seen this issue? The KahaDB files are not being cleaned up even though there are no old messages out there. Disconnecting all clients, the problem did not clear itself, so it doesn't appear to be an issue of unacknowledged messages or anything similar.

Re: [HEADSUP] ActiveMQ 5.10.3 release preparation

Update - this past weekend I did not manage to get any time on this release, and this coming week, I won't be able to put much time into it either. As for a 5.11.2 release, it makes sense to create that release as well. I'll keep you informed. -- View this message in context:

Re: IRC channels - Codehaus to Freenode

Hey, let's make this an announce. I'll tweet it too. Jeff - do you want me to start a new thread with [ANNOUNCE] in the title and copy your text? Hmm, maybe we should put it in the news feed on the activemq website as well... -- View this message in context:

Re: IRC channels - Codehaus to Freenode

Oh, and thanks for taking the action and getting the IRC room properly registered. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/IRC-channels-Codehaus-to-Freenode-tp4695526p4695550.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [HEADSUP] ActiveMQ 5.10.3 release preparation

Hiram - if you provide the specific commands that will get me the exact output you want from the list of commits, then I'll gladly run them. Getting a log of the precise commit list is not trivial in my experience. You're assistance is greatly anticipated. -- View this message in context:

[HEADSUP] ActiveMQ 5.10.3 release preparation

I have started working on the 5.10.3 release. Here is the list of commits that I plan to include in the release. Please advise of others which are important. Note that I haven't yet reviewed open patch submissions and will do so shortly. Also note that I haven't yet confirmed that all of these

Re: [DISCUSS] dev mailing list is cluttered

What are the next steps here? -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-dev-mailing-list-is-cluttered-tp4694420p4695448.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [HEADSUP] ActiveMQ 5.10.3 release preparation

NOTE: commit 72837960cffc58b559ced6c243a459c62cb153cf is not an actual commit from the AMQ repo; the commit be6617507914532188530a605e476cb8ae59cdce covers it. Apologies for any confusion. -- View this message in context:

Re: [HEADSUP] ActiveMQ 5.10.3 release preparation

We can apply that fix it you feel strongly about it. The only reason I'm holding off that specific fix right now is the discussion I started on the ticket regarding the desired new state of operation. I saw your response there - thank you. If we could get Gary to comment, that would address or

Re: [HEADSUP] ActiveMQ 5.10.3 release preparation

To come up with the commit list, I used git log to find all commits from the time of the last release until now, on the master branch. Then, I literally reviewed each, looking at the following: * commit comments * Jira tickets, if any was identified in the commit comment * actual code changes I

Re: [HEADSUP] ActiveMQ 5.10.3 release preparation

I can do that - no problem. But it will have to wait until the cherry harvest is complete. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/HEADSUP-ActiveMQ-5-10-3-release-preparation-tp4695445p4695465.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [HEADSUP] ActiveMQ 5.10.3 release preparation

Thanks JB. I hope we can target a 5.12.0 release for May. If you change your mind and decide some commits are important, please let me know and I'll work with you to either get them in, or decide the best alternate course of action. -- View this message in context:

Re: Special Board Report

I didn't even catch up on this entire thread, so forgive me if I missed something. It's wearing me out - again. Look, it's last minute. No quick fixes are coming. There are some good things happening now, but they won't fix things today or tomorrow. Given the timing and the threat of board

Re: Plan clarification

Hey Bruce - the original thread for the board report was on @dev. Unless there's a real need to take it back to @private, I think it is good to work through the report in the open so members of the community can see the discussion and contribute to it. -- View this message in context:

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move IRC channel to freenode ?

OK, I'll update the Apache ActiveMQ website to refer to the new #apache-activemq channel on freenode and indicate the old channel is deprecated. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Fwd-PROPOSAL-Move-IRC-channel-to-freenode-tp4694923p4695094.html Sent from the

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move IRC channel to freenode ?

Ah - Bruce beat me to the update. I added notes to move away from codehaus and avoid #activemq on FREENODE. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Fwd-PROPOSAL-Move-IRC-channel-to-freenode-tp4694923p4695097.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive

Re: [VOTE] Pick a code name for the HornetQ code donation

I was staying quiet because I didn't feel too strongly about the name, due in part to past use of the name Artemis (outside Apache), but thinking about how the name ActiveMQ ReactiveMQ would likely get shortened by most folks to just ReactiveMQ to eliminate the redundancy, changed my mind... +1

Re: [VOTE] Pick a code name for the HornetQ code donation

Ah, thanks for setting me straight. I am going to stick with Artemis anyway as that was the direction I was leaning originally. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Pick-a-code-name-for-the-HornetQ-code-donation-tp4694889p4695103.html Sent from the

Re: New PR build for ActiveMQ 5.x

Nice touch. Looks like it needed a little tweaking, but looks good now. I agree on the unit testing as well. We want to have some base unit tests to run, but I don't believe we are prepared at this time to do so. -- View this message in context:

Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ ActiveMQ's next generation

+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

Re: [DISCUSS] dev mailing list is cluttered

+1 That works. It looks like the volume of github notifications is much lower - and appear to be mostly pull requests, so moving out the jira entries would be a big win. -- View this message in context:

Re: [DISCUSS] dev mailing list is cluttered

It sounds like the Jira list is the way to go. How can I go about getting the list created and messages redirected? I think iss...@activemq.apache.org is the way to go. Art -- View this message in context:

Re: [DISCUSS] dev mailing list is cluttered

Hey Bruce - I would like to learn the process here. Can you help me? Was the request made simply by creating a Jira entry? -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-dev-mailing-list-is-cluttered-tp4694420p4694448.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing

Re: [DISCUSS] dev mailing list is cluttered

So the Infra team manages Jira and mailing lists? What about nabble - will it also be included, or is there more work to do there? -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-dev-mailing-list-is-cluttered-tp4694420p4694453.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev

Re: [DISCUSS] dev mailing list is cluttered

I'm OK either way. This is something that can be undone without too much hassle if a later objection arises, but not without a little impact (that is messages in the interim being in a different place). -- View this message in context:

Re: ApacheCon 2015

I am coming in Tuesday evening and leaving Wednesday evening and hope to meet as many of the folks here as possible. It sounds like I'll be in too late to catch up with Bruce. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ApacheCon-2015-tp4694315p4694398.html Sent

Re: Code donation for stomp.js

On the placement question - is there anything ActiveMQ-specific? If not, would it be best with its own repo, like ActiveMQ-CPP? -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Code-donation-for-stomp-js-tp4694260p4694276.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list

Re: [PROPOSAL] Pluggable Brokers...

I'm not sure how this proposal fits into the existing ActiveMQ solution at this point. It should be feasible to start down this path and consider how it fits later down the line. Giving it a little thought right now, one possible approach would be to get the API defined, and then make a new

Re: [PROPOSAL] Pluggable Brokers...

This is awesome. I have been thinking of a similar idea. Separation of concerns... Core messaging implementation separated from the overall messaging solution, allowing multiple messaging solutions with varying needs to be maintained separately while also making it possible to replace the engine

Re: [PROPOSAL] Pluggable Brokers...

Right, and users that use STOMP are not concerned with how well the solution works for JMS or AMQP users. Although some users may want support for multiple protocols. That's at least four use-cases right there. An idea that keeps coming to mind -- the computer world has already implemented the

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ 6.0.0 (RC3)

Hey Gary - in all the discussion, I missed this response, so forgive my slow response. First, let me apologize for my use of the word take - it sounds it was read as an attack or accusation, and that was not my intent. I simply meant, why is it important that HornetQ be called AMQ-6? On the

Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ ActiveMQ's next generation

Thank you Rob - that's great insight. It is giving me much on which to reflect. With that said - since the board is involved at this time, would you mind to table this discussion until after we hear from them? While I would love to continue this discussion, learn more, and share ideas, the

Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ ActiveMQ's next generation

David - please go back and read my posts (user name artnaseef, full name Arthur Naseef). I have repeated myself multiple times with concerns. And there has not been constructive response to my concerns, nor to questions I posed in an attempt to get clarity on the position that ActiveMQ needs

Re: CPU core/thread scaling test

A higher load on CPU versus other brokers under the exact same load? Are there any reports with details, such as the topology of brokers and ActiveMQ clients? It would be great to have a baseline to start from, and some detail to review. For example, not being able to saturate a network

Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ ActiveMQ's next generation

I agree with Hadrian again. It's important for HornetQ to grow its own community, and one that stretches beyond the Red Hat. A project at Apache only to satisfy the needs of a single entity does not seem appropriate. *AMQ-6 Name* I would also like to re-hash the concern of using the AMQ-6 name.

Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ ActiveMQ's next generation

I agree with the value of getting more folks involved with coding. When questions and attempts to contribute are met with silence and resistance, it is discouraging. I personally had that experience and gave up more than once. -- View this message in context:

Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ ActiveMQ's next generation

Hey - it's clear we are not moving toward consensus right now. I'm going to break off and give some time to hear from others and consider the entire situation more carefully. -- View this message in context:

Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ ActiveMQ's next generation

I don't agree with the presumption that ActiveMQ *needs* a *new* broker. Nor with the argument that it will die out if it doesn't get one. Whole-sale replacement is hard. I worked in a company that *still* uses technology dating back to 1980 because several efforts to whole-sale replace the

Re: CPU core/thread scaling test

Oh, very nice. I was thinking ActiveMQ would do well to have its own load tests from which baseline measurements could be taken. Perhaps with a separate source code repository dedicated to the purpose? -- View this message in context:

Re: CPU core/thread scaling test

That would be wise - both the naming, and the ducking! -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/CPU-core-thread-scaling-test-tp4693913p4694007.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ ActiveMQ's next generation

5.x needs a new core. I think this point is really at the heart of the entire disagreement here. The initial grant vote did not mention that HornetQ was going to be taken as a *replacement* for the entirety of ActiveMQ. As several folks have mentioned here, we had the impression the code was

Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ ActiveMQ's next generation

That's great to hear that you have a large working HornetQ installation. Why is renaming HornetQ to ActiveMQ-6 important to you? -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-HornetQ-ActiveMQ-s-next-generation-tp4693781p4693863.html Sent from the ActiveMQ -

Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ ActiveMQ's next generation

Oh, and to your question - yes, it is reasonable to have 2 apache brokers. There are already many Apache projects sharing spaces. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-HornetQ-ActiveMQ-s-next-generation-tp4693781p4693864.html Sent from the ActiveMQ -

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ 6.0.0 (RC3)

Do you seriously think that would be wise? Now it sounds like your advocating that we *could* have two separate brokers maintained, but just using the same exact name by skipping around major version numbers. I certainly will not back *that* plan. Honestly, this response confuses me. I thought

Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ ActiveMQ's next generation

I see how one could get that impression. It's a shame it wasn't explicit in the original vote. Then we wouldn't have this confusion. Poor communication is leading to conflict, division, and discouragement. -- View this message in context:

Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ ActiveMQ's next generation

That's great. I hope I've made it clear that I want to see HornetQ continue on as well. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-HornetQ-ActiveMQ-s-next-generation-tp4693781p4693871.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ ActiveMQ's next generation

Growing the community around HornetQ is the same issue regardless of the naming - it needs to happen, and just naming it ActiveMQ 6 doesn't really change anything other than to create the presumption that HornetQ will succeed as ActiveMQ 6. Sharing a direction across the community is important,

Re: [DISCUSS} HornetQ ActiveMQ's next generation

+1 Hadrian Reports of ActiveMQ's death have been grossly exaggerated. (borrowing from Mark Twain) There is definitely a sense that many of the members of this PMC are tired of maintaining the existing code base. That's understandable - they've been the key folks for a long time, and I for one

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ 6.0.0 (RC3)

What will it take for HornetQ to become ActiveMQ-6? That question keeps coming to mind. At first, I was looking at the question strictly from a technical perspective. But considering the community and Apache involvement, the answer to that question becomes more complex. Naming releases of

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ 6.0.0 (RC3)

Thinking about the issue of community and community-building, I agree with Hadrian here. HornetQ could have been its own project, built-up its own community (including winning over members from the AMQ community who are behind it) and started on its own footing. There's nothing that would have

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ 6.0.0 (RC3)

I don't see how a separate hornetQ project is a clear declaration of ActiveMQ's future, nor why that matters to the discussion. Wanting to engage the existing ActiveMQ community to the benefit of HornetQ is understandable, but that doesn't make it the right thing to do. Especially for ActiveMQ

  1   2   3   >