ActiveMQ Website / News

[Charles Anthony <ch...@hpdsoftware.com>]

Hi,
 
I remembered seeing on the list that a 4.02 had just been released, and
so I went to http://www.activemq.org <http://www.activemq.orgI>  to find
it.
 
The home page, as we know, has "News" on it :It doesn't mention *any*
4.0 release, and is in ascending date order - meaning that the latest
news is at the bottom; the "latest" news being from over a year ago
(August 25, 2005).
 
The same info and "issue" also occurs on
http://www.activemq.org/site/news.html which I suppose is not surprising
- but in addition, it has a confluence feed telling us all about changes
on other codehaus projects, which as AMQ is no longer a codehaus project
is perhaps a little confusing.
 
Now, I don't suppose any of this is really of critical importance. I
think that the lack-of-news was probably caused by a hardware failure a
month or so back, and I knew where to find what I was looking for (well,
duh, the downloads link) - but I'm just thinking of
prospective/returning users who may well be put off by a significantly
out of date first page.
 
Cheers,
 
Charles.

Re: ActiveMQ Website / News

[Rob Davies <ra...@gmail.com>]

Hi Charles,

thank you for pointing this out!  We will look at updating the news  
for the site from now on!

cheers,

rob

On 17 Nov 2006, at 08:18, Charles Anthony wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I remembered seeing on the list that a 4.02 had just been released,  
> and
> so I went to http://www.activemq.org <http://www.activemq.orgI>  to  
> find
> it.
>
> The home page, as we know, has "News" on it :It doesn't mention *any*
> 4.0 release, and is in ascending date order - meaning that the latest
> news is at the bottom; the "latest" news being from over a year ago
> (August 25, 2005).
>
> The same info and "issue" also occurs on
> http://www.activemq.org/site/news.html which I suppose is not  
> surprising
> - but in addition, it has a confluence feed telling us all about  
> changes
> on other codehaus projects, which as AMQ is no longer a codehaus  
> project
> is perhaps a little confusing.
>
> Now, I don't suppose any of this is really of critical importance. I
> think that the lack-of-news was probably caused by a hardware  
> failure a
> month or so back, and I knew where to find what I was looking for  
> (well,
> duh, the downloads link) - but I'm just thinking of
> prospective/returning users who may well be put off by a significantly
> out of date first page.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Charles.