James.Strachan wrote: > > On 6/28/07, Tom Samplonius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I have to agree with most of this. ActiveMQ is a buggy as hell. > > Thats a bit of an exaggeration & a comment thats hardly likely to get > the volunteers on the list to help you solve your particular issues. > >
Waiting for the dust to settle .... OK. I think I have spent a few days with ActiveMQ and am working through various problems. The speed of development is very high (which is a good thing) but usually leads to instability in the transition period. It also leaves the documentation lacking. I have been checking out the trunk and importing it as an eclipse project. it is very well written and the unit tests are there for those inclined to write them. I know it takes some time but it would be better to hit James and team with reproducible tests (at minimum) and patches (ideally). I would like to see a ActiveMQ testing kit evolve independently of the ActiveMQ version that tests ActiveMQ from a JMS client, failover, guarenteed delivery etc prespective. I see the testcases under org.apache.activemq.usecases as a starting point. These are different from unit test cases that have to be closely tied to implementation classes. These tests would test ActiveMQ as an external system so would depend upon config files and the like but will test ActiveMQ from a users prespective. This would also include simulating crashes with real world emphasis like doing a kill -9 on activemq broker and recovering from that. This would help fight FUD and give ActiveMQ the stability desired from a user prespective while allowing for rapid development of new features. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/About-releases-and-bugs-tf3987476s2354.html#a11364092 Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
