There's no other active development (new stuff) on ActiveMQ land other than ActiveMQ Artemis.
Regardless... It is proving to be a strong broker.. I think you guys would only gain by supporting it... And we would welcome interaction. This thread is a few months old.. so it's probably moot what I'm saying here.. (I even saw a PR sent yesterday by Jonathan Gallimore.. I'm looking to make it easier for Tomee users to use Artemis. There's a blog on how to do it.. but it seemed complex (even for me.. I can do maybe once.. not always). maybe automate the process through a command in Artemis? have it pre-integrated in Tomee? I'm not sure what are the options. On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 8:49 AM, COURTAULT Francois <francois.courta...@gemalto.com> wrote: > Hello Romain, > > Focusing on Active MQ future. Active MQ 6.0 was Appolo project > (http://activemq.apache.org/new-features-in-60.html) but this one has been > unofficially declared dead in July 2015. Then it seems that Artemis could > become the next version of Active MQ. > So the future of the underlying JMS TomEE stuff is unclear :-( > > Best Regards. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibu...@gmail.com] > Sent: vendredi 3 mars 2017 14:35 > To: COURTAULT Francois <francois.courta...@gemalto.com> > Cc: users@tomee.apache.org > Subject: [+SPAM+]: Re: About TomEE 7.x specification supported clarification > > 2017-03-03 14:26 GMT+01:00 COURTAULT Francois < > francois.courta...@gemalto.com>: > >> Hello Romain, >> >> >> >> What are the JMS 2 features not supported in TomEE 7.x version ? >> > > Few advanced programmatic API we can't access that easily but most of it > should work. > > >> It seems that the successor of ActiveMQ is ActiveMQ Artemis: do you >> plan to integrate this version in TomEE ? >> >> >> > > Was ActiveMQ 5-next, now it is ActiveMQ 6. Think when Fuse got bought by > redhat Artemis got kind of abandonned even if not sure. > > >> Best Regards. >> >> >> >> *From:* Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibu...@gmail.com] >> *Sent:* vendredi 3 mars 2017 14:12 >> *To:* COURTAULT Francois <francois.courta...@gemalto.com> >> *Cc:* users@tomee.apache.org >> >> *Subject:* Re: About TomEE 7.x specification supported clarification >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 2017-03-03 14:07 GMT+01:00 COURTAULT Francois <Francois.Courtault@gemalto. >> com>: >> >> Hello, >> >> First, thanks for your feedbacks :-) >> >> Summary for the Full profile compliancy: >> - JMS 2 not implemented in ActiveMQ 5.x, right ? Do you know >> when JMS 2.0 should be implemented in ActiveMQ and in which version ? >> >> >> >> in AMQ 5 no but in TomEE we wrapped it to support several features >> like JMSContext for instance, AMQ5 will never get it, AMQ 6 has it but >> has few link with AMQ 5 (it is another project). >> >> >> >> - JPA 2.1 not implemented by Open JPA in webprofile and plus >> TomEE flavors but is implemented in Plume flavor thanks to EclipseLink >> 6.3, right ? >> >> >> >> Don't think we use 6.3 but answering from memory but it is 2.1 yes >> >> >> >> >> Best Regards. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibu...@gmail.com] >> Sent: vendredi 3 mars 2017 13:29 >> To: users@tomee.apache.org >> Subject: Re: About TomEE 7.x specification supported clarification >> >> Hi >> >> that's a bit more complicated >> >> - certification: implies legal process with oracle, we are not there >> - EE 7 "compliance"/"support": think except JPA 2.1 with openjpa >> distributions we target most of it - with some exceptions on JMS 2 >> with ActiveMQ 5. >> >> >> To answer the original questions both spec s are in tomee plus and >> concurrency utilities is in web profile too (cause used internally for >> EJB @Asynchronous to make it simple). I'm not sure the point about >> websocket which is in all version since tomcat has it. >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog < >> https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog < >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github >> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> >> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory >> | < >> https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> >> >> >> 2017-03-03 13:19 GMT+01:00 Danilo Cominotti Marques >> <dcominot...@gmail.com >> >: >> >> > From what I understand, it is only OpenJPA (which is not JPA 2.1 >> > compliant yet, but rather 2.0) that is holding back the Java EE 7 >> > compliance. The OpenJPA 3.x series should fix that. >> > >> > On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Yann Blazart >> > <yann.blaz...@bycode.fr> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Hello. >> > > >> > > TomEE is not certified, but it's a full EE! More than weblogic >> > > 12.2.1, trust me :) >> > > >> > > I imagine that certification process is complicated or cost a much. >> > > >> > > Le 3 mars 2017 12:45 PM, "COURTAULT Francois" < >> > > francois.courta...@gemalto.com> a écrit : >> > > >> > > > Hello, >> > > > >> > > > If I refer to http://tomee.apache.org/comparison.html , it seems >> > > > that, for TomEE 7.x, JBatch and Concurrency Utilities for EE are >> > > > available >> > even >> > > > if those specifications aren't included in the Java EE Web >> > > > Profile, >> > > right ? >> > > > >> > > > * JBatch is available in TomEE Plus, right ? >> > > > >> > > > * Concurrency Utilities for EE is available in TomEE web >> > profile, >> > > > right ? >> > > > >> > > > In such case, we could say that TomEE Plus is more or less Java >> > > > EE full profile compliant. As web socket in included in Tomcat, >> > > > what are the missing specifications in TomEE Plus which prevent >> > > > this version to not >> > be >> > > > Full profile compliant ? >> > > > >> > > > Best Regards. >> > > > ________________________________ This message and any >> > > > attachments are intended solely for the addressees and may >> > > > contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use or >> > > > disclosure, either whole or partial, is >> prohibited. >> > > > E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be >> > > > liable >> > > for >> > > > the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the >> > intended >> > > > recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the sender. >> > > > Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this >> > transmission >> > > > free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for damages >> > > > caused by >> > a >> > > > transmitted virus. >> > > > >> > > >> > >> ________________________________ >> This message and any attachments are intended solely for the >> addressees and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized >> use or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited. >> E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be liable >> for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the >> intended recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the sender. >> Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this >> transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for >> damages caused by a transmitted virus. >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> This message and any attachments are intended solely for the >> addressees and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized >> use or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited. >> E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be liable >> for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the >> intended recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the sender. >> Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this >> transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for >> damages caused by a transmitted virus. >> > ________________________________ > This message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressees and > may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use or disclosure, > either whole or partial, is prohibited. > E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be liable for > the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the intended > recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the sender. > Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this transmission free > from viruses, the sender will not be liable for damages caused by a > transmitted virus. -- Clebert Suconic
