You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@activemq.apache.org by Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> on 2020/05/06 05:31:53 UTC
[PROPOSAL] Apache ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0
Hi all,
I would like to release ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0.
They include fixes affecting several users (on http proxy, on xstream CPU use, etc) and couple of improvements.
About 5.16.0, we have two options:
1. I’m releasing as it is: it’s JDK 11 compliant at runtime, but the build is not fully JDK 11.
2. I’m removing leveldb, scala, and update the branch to fully build with JDK 11. I can postpone this for 5.17.x with JMS 2.x support (already started).
Thoughts ?
Regards
JB
Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
It’s already on the way, I started the review and merge one already.
Regards
JB
> Le 6 mai 2020 à 08:23, Colm O hEigeartaigh <co...@apache.org> a écrit :
>
> Hi JB,
>
> I have a bunch of outstanding PRs that should be considered for inclusion
> in the releases: https://github.com/apache/activemq/pulls/coheigea
>
> Also, see my earlier message about the possibility of disabling the REST
> API for 5.16.0 by default.
>
> Otherwise, +1 from me.
>
> Colm.
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 6:31 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I would like to release ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0.
>>
>> They include fixes affecting several users (on http proxy, on xstream CPU
>> use, etc) and couple of improvements.
>>
>> About 5.16.0, we have two options:
>> 1. I’m releasing as it is: it’s JDK 11 compliant at runtime, but the build
>> is not fully JDK 11.
>> 2. I’m removing leveldb, scala, and update the branch to fully build with
>> JDK 11. I can postpone this for 5.17.x with JMS 2.x support (already
>> started).
>>
>> Thoughts ?
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0
Posted by Colm O hEigeartaigh <co...@apache.org>.
Hi JB,
I have a bunch of outstanding PRs that should be considered for inclusion
in the releases: https://github.com/apache/activemq/pulls/coheigea
Also, see my earlier message about the possibility of disabling the REST
API for 5.16.0 by default.
Otherwise, +1 from me.
Colm.
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 6:31 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to release ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0.
>
> They include fixes affecting several users (on http proxy, on xstream CPU
> use, etc) and couple of improvements.
>
> About 5.16.0, we have two options:
> 1. I’m releasing as it is: it’s JDK 11 compliant at runtime, but the build
> is not fully JDK 11.
> 2. I’m removing leveldb, scala, and update the branch to fully build with
> JDK 11. I can postpone this for 5.17.x with JMS 2.x support (already
> started).
>
> Thoughts ?
>
> Regards
> JB
Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Fair enough, I’m cutting the release.
Regards
JB
> Le 22 juin 2020 à 17:08, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> I think we all know the point was not 'dont send updates', but rather
> 'dont continually expand the scope and then never release it, after
> giving update upon update saying its ready for release' ;)
>
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 at 15:49, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>
>> OK, next time, I won’t send any update and just cut the release ;)
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>>> Le 22 juin 2020 à 16:44, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>>>
>>> Emails noting '5.16.0 soon' are getting a bit tedious given its
>>> description many times over several months as being ready for vote
>>> 'now', 'tomorrow', or 'next week'.
>>>
>>> It's ok to actually release it. Other version numbers are available
>>> for future changes.
>>>
>>> Robbie
>>>
>>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 at 14:23, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>
>>>> After 5.15.13, I’m preparing ActiveMQ 5.16.0 with JDK 11 runtime and preview on JMS 2.0 (as requested on Jira by some users).
>>>>
>>>> I will share more details soon about timing and 5.16.0 content.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> JB
>>>>
>>>>> Le 16 mai 2020 à 07:24, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>>
>>>>> Just to let you know that I’m still working on these releases preparation. I identify couple of issues I would like to fix.
>>>>>
>>>>> I plan to submit the releases to vote next week.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> JB
>>>>>
>>>>>> Le 6 mai 2020 à 07:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> a écrit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like to release ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They include fixes affecting several users (on http proxy, on xstream CPU use, etc) and couple of improvements.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> About 5.16.0, we have two options:
>>>>>> 1. I’m releasing as it is: it’s JDK 11 compliant at runtime, but the build is not fully JDK 11.
>>>>>> 2. I’m removing leveldb, scala, and update the branch to fully build with JDK 11. I can postpone this for 5.17.x with JMS 2.x support (already started).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> JB
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>.
I think we all know the point was not 'dont send updates', but rather
'dont continually expand the scope and then never release it, after
giving update upon update saying its ready for release' ;)
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 at 15:49, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
> OK, next time, I won’t send any update and just cut the release ;)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> > Le 22 juin 2020 à 16:44, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >
> > Emails noting '5.16.0 soon' are getting a bit tedious given its
> > description many times over several months as being ready for vote
> > 'now', 'tomorrow', or 'next week'.
> >
> > It's ok to actually release it. Other version numbers are available
> > for future changes.
> >
> > Robbie
> >
> > On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 at 14:23, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi guys,
> >>
> >> After 5.15.13, I’m preparing ActiveMQ 5.16.0 with JDK 11 runtime and preview on JMS 2.0 (as requested on Jira by some users).
> >>
> >> I will share more details soon about timing and 5.16.0 content.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> JB
> >>
> >>> Le 16 mai 2020 à 07:24, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> a écrit :
> >>>
> >>> Hi guys,
> >>>
> >>> Just to let you know that I’m still working on these releases preparation. I identify couple of issues I would like to fix.
> >>>
> >>> I plan to submit the releases to vote next week.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> JB
> >>>
> >>>> Le 6 mai 2020 à 07:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> a écrit :
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>> I would like to release ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0.
> >>>>
> >>>> They include fixes affecting several users (on http proxy, on xstream CPU use, etc) and couple of improvements.
> >>>>
> >>>> About 5.16.0, we have two options:
> >>>> 1. I’m releasing as it is: it’s JDK 11 compliant at runtime, but the build is not fully JDK 11.
> >>>> 2. I’m removing leveldb, scala, and update the branch to fully build with JDK 11. I can postpone this for 5.17.x with JMS 2.x support (already started).
> >>>>
> >>>> Thoughts ?
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards
> >>>> JB
> >>>
> >>
>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
OK, next time, I won’t send any update and just cut the release ;)
Regards
JB
> Le 22 juin 2020 à 16:44, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> Emails noting '5.16.0 soon' are getting a bit tedious given its
> description many times over several months as being ready for vote
> 'now', 'tomorrow', or 'next week'.
>
> It's ok to actually release it. Other version numbers are available
> for future changes.
>
> Robbie
>
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 at 14:23, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> After 5.15.13, I’m preparing ActiveMQ 5.16.0 with JDK 11 runtime and preview on JMS 2.0 (as requested on Jira by some users).
>>
>> I will share more details soon about timing and 5.16.0 content.
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>>> Le 16 mai 2020 à 07:24, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> a écrit :
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> Just to let you know that I’m still working on these releases preparation. I identify couple of issues I would like to fix.
>>>
>>> I plan to submit the releases to vote next week.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>>> Le 6 mai 2020 à 07:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I would like to release ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0.
>>>>
>>>> They include fixes affecting several users (on http proxy, on xstream CPU use, etc) and couple of improvements.
>>>>
>>>> About 5.16.0, we have two options:
>>>> 1. I’m releasing as it is: it’s JDK 11 compliant at runtime, but the build is not fully JDK 11.
>>>> 2. I’m removing leveldb, scala, and update the branch to fully build with JDK 11. I can postpone this for 5.17.x with JMS 2.x support (already started).
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts ?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> JB
>>>
>>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>.
Emails noting '5.16.0 soon' are getting a bit tedious given its
description many times over several months as being ready for vote
'now', 'tomorrow', or 'next week'.
It's ok to actually release it. Other version numbers are available
for future changes.
Robbie
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 at 14:23, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> After 5.15.13, I’m preparing ActiveMQ 5.16.0 with JDK 11 runtime and preview on JMS 2.0 (as requested on Jira by some users).
>
> I will share more details soon about timing and 5.16.0 content.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> > Le 16 mai 2020 à 07:24, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> a écrit :
> >
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > Just to let you know that I’m still working on these releases preparation. I identify couple of issues I would like to fix.
> >
> > I plan to submit the releases to vote next week.
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> >> Le 6 mai 2020 à 07:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> a écrit :
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I would like to release ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0.
> >>
> >> They include fixes affecting several users (on http proxy, on xstream CPU use, etc) and couple of improvements.
> >>
> >> About 5.16.0, we have two options:
> >> 1. I’m releasing as it is: it’s JDK 11 compliant at runtime, but the build is not fully JDK 11.
> >> 2. I’m removing leveldb, scala, and update the branch to fully build with JDK 11. I can postpone this for 5.17.x with JMS 2.x support (already started).
> >>
> >> Thoughts ?
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> JB
> >
>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Hi guys,
After 5.15.13, I’m preparing ActiveMQ 5.16.0 with JDK 11 runtime and preview on JMS 2.0 (as requested on Jira by some users).
I will share more details soon about timing and 5.16.0 content.
Regards
JB
> Le 16 mai 2020 à 07:24, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> a écrit :
>
> Hi guys,
>
> Just to let you know that I’m still working on these releases preparation. I identify couple of issues I would like to fix.
>
> I plan to submit the releases to vote next week.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>> Le 6 mai 2020 à 07:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> a écrit :
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I would like to release ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0.
>>
>> They include fixes affecting several users (on http proxy, on xstream CPU use, etc) and couple of improvements.
>>
>> About 5.16.0, we have two options:
>> 1. I’m releasing as it is: it’s JDK 11 compliant at runtime, but the build is not fully JDK 11.
>> 2. I’m removing leveldb, scala, and update the branch to fully build with JDK 11. I can postpone this for 5.17.x with JMS 2.x support (already started).
>>
>> Thoughts ?
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Hi guys,
Just to let you know that I’m still working on these releases preparation. I identify couple of issues I would like to fix.
I plan to submit the releases to vote next week.
Regards
JB
> Le 6 mai 2020 à 07:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> a écrit :
>
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to release ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0.
>
> They include fixes affecting several users (on http proxy, on xstream CPU use, etc) and couple of improvements.
>
> About 5.16.0, we have two options:
> 1. I’m releasing as it is: it’s JDK 11 compliant at runtime, but the build is not fully JDK 11.
> 2. I’m removing leveldb, scala, and update the branch to fully build with JDK 11. I can postpone this for 5.17.x with JMS 2.x support (already started).
>
> Thoughts ?
>
> Regards
> JB
Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0
Posted by Francois Papon <fr...@openobject.fr>.
Hi JB,
+1 for the option 1 for me.
regards,
François
fpapon@apache.org
Le 06/05/2020 à 07:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofre a écrit :
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to release ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0.
>
> They include fixes affecting several users (on http proxy, on xstream CPU use, etc) and couple of improvements.
>
> About 5.16.0, we have two options:
> 1. I’m releasing as it is: it’s JDK 11 compliant at runtime, but the build is not fully JDK 11.
> 2. I’m removing leveldb, scala, and update the branch to fully build with JDK 11. I can postpone this for 5.17.x with JMS 2.x support (already started).
>
> Thoughts ?
>
> Regards
> JB
Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Hi,
I agree to cut both 5.16.0 and 5.15.13 and I propose to wait next week before to start the vote.
Anyway, I need some days to prepare the release (I’m working on some improvements, reviewing PR, etc).
Thanks again !
Regards
JB
> Le 6 mai 2020 à 12:16, Christopher Shannon <ch...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> JB,
>
> I will also add that I am out of the office util Monday but next week I can
> do the 5.16.0 release work if you don't have time to do it before then.
> 5.16.0 really needs to go out sooner rather than later.
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 6:10 AM Christopher Shannon <
> christopher.l.shannon@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> As Robbie stated, 5.16.0 should go out as is so option 1 is the best one
>> to me. We need to cut off non blocking changes and get the release out as
>> it has been a long time coming. As long as it is runtime compatible with
>> JDK 8+ and runs fine on JDK 11 then that will work.
>>
>> In 5.17.0 we can remove LevelDB and support JDK 11 builds. Hopefully we
>> can get this release out faster as it would be nice to be able to
>> finally use JDK 11 to build. We have the option in 5.17.0 to still target
>> JDK 8 or we could just target 11+, but either way JDK 11 needs to work to
>> build.
>>
>> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 4:45 AM Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> As with the other times this was discussed, I think 1) makes most
>>> sense still. If you think the bits are in a releaseable state now,
>>> then it seems sensible to proceed with the existing stable base rather
>>> than expanding and likely delaying the release yet again. Releasing
>>> gets the finished changes people have been waiting for out, and you
>>> can start fresh on big changes for the next version at the front of a
>>> release cycle rather than lumping them in at the end. The next set of
>>> changes can then arrive on their own however soon they are ready for
>>> release, in a smaller targetted release.
>>>
>>> On Wed, 6 May 2020 at 06:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I would like to release ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0.
>>>>
>>>> They include fixes affecting several users (on http proxy, on xstream
>>> CPU use, etc) and couple of improvements.
>>>>
>>>> About 5.16.0, we have two options:
>>>> 1. I’m releasing as it is: it’s JDK 11 compliant at runtime, but the
>>> build is not fully JDK 11.
>>>> 2. I’m removing leveldb, scala, and update the branch to fully build
>>> with JDK 11. I can postpone this for 5.17.x with JMS 2.x support (already
>>> started).
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts ?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> JB
>>>
>>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0
Posted by Christopher Shannon <ch...@gmail.com>.
JB,
I will also add that I am out of the office util Monday but next week I can
do the 5.16.0 release work if you don't have time to do it before then.
5.16.0 really needs to go out sooner rather than later.
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 6:10 AM Christopher Shannon <
christopher.l.shannon@gmail.com> wrote:
> As Robbie stated, 5.16.0 should go out as is so option 1 is the best one
> to me. We need to cut off non blocking changes and get the release out as
> it has been a long time coming. As long as it is runtime compatible with
> JDK 8+ and runs fine on JDK 11 then that will work.
>
> In 5.17.0 we can remove LevelDB and support JDK 11 builds. Hopefully we
> can get this release out faster as it would be nice to be able to
> finally use JDK 11 to build. We have the option in 5.17.0 to still target
> JDK 8 or we could just target 11+, but either way JDK 11 needs to work to
> build.
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 4:45 AM Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> As with the other times this was discussed, I think 1) makes most
>> sense still. If you think the bits are in a releaseable state now,
>> then it seems sensible to proceed with the existing stable base rather
>> than expanding and likely delaying the release yet again. Releasing
>> gets the finished changes people have been waiting for out, and you
>> can start fresh on big changes for the next version at the front of a
>> release cycle rather than lumping them in at the end. The next set of
>> changes can then arrive on their own however soon they are ready for
>> release, in a smaller targetted release.
>>
>> On Wed, 6 May 2020 at 06:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I would like to release ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0.
>> >
>> > They include fixes affecting several users (on http proxy, on xstream
>> CPU use, etc) and couple of improvements.
>> >
>> > About 5.16.0, we have two options:
>> > 1. I’m releasing as it is: it’s JDK 11 compliant at runtime, but the
>> build is not fully JDK 11.
>> > 2. I’m removing leveldb, scala, and update the branch to fully build
>> with JDK 11. I can postpone this for 5.17.x with JMS 2.x support (already
>> started).
>> >
>> > Thoughts ?
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > JB
>>
>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0
Posted by Christopher Shannon <ch...@gmail.com>.
As Robbie stated, 5.16.0 should go out as is so option 1 is the best one to
me. We need to cut off non blocking changes and get the release out as it
has been a long time coming. As long as it is runtime compatible with JDK
8+ and runs fine on JDK 11 then that will work.
In 5.17.0 we can remove LevelDB and support JDK 11 builds. Hopefully we can
get this release out faster as it would be nice to be able to finally use
JDK 11 to build. We have the option in 5.17.0 to still target JDK 8 or we
could just target 11+, but either way JDK 11 needs to work to build.
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 4:45 AM Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> As with the other times this was discussed, I think 1) makes most
> sense still. If you think the bits are in a releaseable state now,
> then it seems sensible to proceed with the existing stable base rather
> than expanding and likely delaying the release yet again. Releasing
> gets the finished changes people have been waiting for out, and you
> can start fresh on big changes for the next version at the front of a
> release cycle rather than lumping them in at the end. The next set of
> changes can then arrive on their own however soon they are ready for
> release, in a smaller targetted release.
>
> On Wed, 6 May 2020 at 06:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I would like to release ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0.
> >
> > They include fixes affecting several users (on http proxy, on xstream
> CPU use, etc) and couple of improvements.
> >
> > About 5.16.0, we have two options:
> > 1. I’m releasing as it is: it’s JDK 11 compliant at runtime, but the
> build is not fully JDK 11.
> > 2. I’m removing leveldb, scala, and update the branch to fully build
> with JDK 11. I can postpone this for 5.17.x with JMS 2.x support (already
> started).
> >
> > Thoughts ?
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>.
As with the other times this was discussed, I think 1) makes most
sense still. If you think the bits are in a releaseable state now,
then it seems sensible to proceed with the existing stable base rather
than expanding and likely delaying the release yet again. Releasing
gets the finished changes people have been waiting for out, and you
can start fresh on big changes for the next version at the front of a
release cycle rather than lumping them in at the end. The next set of
changes can then arrive on their own however soon they are ready for
release, in a smaller targetted release.
On Wed, 6 May 2020 at 06:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to release ActiveMQ 5.15.13 and 5.16.0.
>
> They include fixes affecting several users (on http proxy, on xstream CPU use, etc) and couple of improvements.
>
> About 5.16.0, we have two options:
> 1. I’m releasing as it is: it’s JDK 11 compliant at runtime, but the build is not fully JDK 11.
> 2. I’m removing leveldb, scala, and update the branch to fully build with JDK 11. I can postpone this for 5.17.x with JMS 2.x support (already started).
>
> Thoughts ?
>
> Regards
> JB