The Apache ActiveMQ Project is pleased to announce the availability of
Apollo 1.0 Beta 4. ActiveMQ Apollo is a faster, more reliable, easier
to maintain messaging broker built from the foundations of the
original ActiveMQ. It is focused on being the fastest most reliable
STOMP 1.1 and 1.0 server
Is ActiveMQ to be discontinued in favour of this in the future?
On 7 July 2011 16:26, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com wrote:
The Apache ActiveMQ Project is pleased to announce the availability of
Apollo 1.0 Beta 4. ActiveMQ Apollo is a faster, more reliable, easier
to maintain messaging
No. This is just a new messaging engine with a different
architecture. It has a reduced set of features when compared to
ActiveMQ 5.x. The hopes are that it will eventually contain enough
features to become the engine that drives the next major revision of
ActiveMQ. This is a little similar to
Do you intend on adding additional transports to Apollo then? Or will it
inherit ActiveMQ's additional transports when folded back in?
On 7 July 2011 16:40, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com wrote:
No. This is just a new messaging engine with a different
architecture. It has a reduced set
Yes,
We intend to add transports back in to get to feature parity /w
ActiveMQ 5 where it makes sense. Which transport is it that interests
you?
Regards,
Hiram
FuseSource
Web: http://fusesource.com/
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:04 PM, James Green james.mk.gr...@gmail.com wrote:
Do you intend
To chime in as well, I'm currently using openwire with activemq via apache
camel.
Once openwire is added to apollo, will upgrading be essentially just
switching the server uri?
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.comwrote:
Yes,
We intend to add transports back
From the point of view of the clients, yes. We may need to develop a
migration script of procedure to migrate ActiveMQ 5 deployments.
Regards,
Hiram
FuseSource
Web: http://fusesource.com/
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:54 PM, Tommy Chheng tommy.chh...@gmail.com wrote:
To chime in as well, I'm
