On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Timothy Bish wrote:
> On 02/19/2015 08:01 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>
>> Any more opinions out there on the name/version of the new client? If
>> not, I'll likely proceed to update the version to 0.1.0[-SNAPSHOT],
>> leave the module names as qpid-jms-foo, and beg
On 02/19/2015 08:01 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Any more opinions out there on the name/version of the new client? If
not, I'll likely proceed to update the version to 0.1.0[-SNAPSHOT],
leave the module names as qpid-jms-foo, and begin working on setting
up a Jenkins job to publish snapshots to rep
Any more opinions out there on the name/version of the new client? If
not, I'll likely proceed to update the version to 0.1.0[-SNAPSHOT],
leave the module names as qpid-jms-foo, and begin working on setting
up a Jenkins job to publish snapshots to repository.apache.org later
today or tomorrow.
Rob
On 19 February 2015 at 08:34, Erik Aschenbrenner wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> thank you again for your answer. I requested the server logs from the
> service provider who runs the broker. I keep you posted ;-)
>
>
Thanks Erik,
I'll have a look at the client code and see if I can ensure that a suitable
l
