[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       activemq-dev
Subject:    Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.14.0
From:       Krzysztof <h4vret () gmail ! com>
Date:       2020-07-14 18:46:43
Message-ID: CAODH0L2iQyuhqk1+i3+7y-3tr=jVd1Vyqz7q4bFze7MqMh_sFg () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


I mean workaround for ARTEMIS-2815*

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 8:45 PM Krzysztof <h4vret@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 non-binding
> 
> I checked the following things:
> - Ran NMS.AMQP integration test suite
> - Ran .NET Client for ActiveMQ Artemis integration test suite with removed
> workaround for ARTEMIS-2614
> 
> Everything seems to be fine.
> 
> Cheers
> Krzysztof
> 
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 8:09 PM michael.andre.pearce
> <michael.andre.pearce@me.com.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > +1 (binding) lgtmSent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> > -------- Original message --------From: Christopher Shannon <
> > christopher.l.shannon@gmail.com> Date: 13/07/2020  13:41  (GMT+00:00)
> > To: dev@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis
> > 2.14.0 +1, everything looks good to meOn Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 8:02 AM
> > Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemmell@gmail.com>wrote:> On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 at
> > 14:26, Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>> wrote:> >> > I would
> > like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.14.0 release.> >> > We only
> > added one feature as part of this release:> >> > [ARTEMIS-2770] - Update
> > diverts using the management API> >> > And we have quite a few improvements
> > on this release:> >> > [ARTEMIS-2109] - enable building Artemis with JDK
> > 11+> > [ARTEMIS-2771] - Support JVM GC & thread metrics> > [ARTEMIS-2776] -
> > Dockerfile improvements to startup arguments> > [ARTEMIS-2786] - Timestamp
> > in console is incorrect> > [ARTEMIS-2787] - Allow a queue to be disabled,
> > so that messages are not> > routed to it.> > [ARTEMIS-2797] - Reset queue
> > properties by unsetting them in broker.xml> > [ARTEMIS-2807] - Avoid
> > notifications on critical IO error> > [ARTEMIS-2820] - Undeploy diverts by
> > removing them from broker.xml> > [ARTEMIS-2827] - Add
> > addressMemoryUsagePercentage as metric> > [ARTEMIS-2828] - Add addressSize
> > as metric> >> >> >> > The whole release notes is here:> >>
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12348290&styleName= \
> > &projectId=12315920&Create=Create&atl_token=A5KQ-2QAV-T4JA-FDED_4d142d7a703c84c576af5fabc058fb51bb1473f2_lin>
> > 
> > > > > > > Source and binary distributions can be found here:> >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/activemq/activemq-artemis/2.14.0/>
> > > > > The Maven repository is here:> >>
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheactivemq-1214>
> > > > > In case you want to give it a try with the maven repo on examples:> >>
> > http://activemq.apache.org/components/artemis/documentation/hacking-guide/validating-releases.html>
> > 
> > > > > > > I will update the website after the vote has passed.> >> >> > [ ]
> > +1 approve the release as Apache Artemis 2.4.0> > [ ] +0 no opinion> > [ ]
> > -1 disapprove (and reason why)> > --> > Clebert Suconic>> +1
> > (non-binding)>> I checked things over as follows:> - Verified the signature
> > + checksum files.> - Checked for LICENCE and NOTICE files in archives.> -
> > Verified licence headers in the source archive using:> "mvn
> > apache-rat:check -DskipLicenseCheck=false"> - Ran the source build and the
> > AMQP integration tests on JDK 8 and 11 with:> "mvn clean install
> > -DskipTests && cd tests/integration-tests/ && mvn> test -Ptests
> > -Dtest=org.apache.activemq.artemis.tests.integration.amqp.**"> - Ran Qpid
> > JMS 0.52.0 HelloWorld against a broker started from the> binary archive on
> > JDK 8 and 11.>> Aside: the ballot paper style text at the bottom refers to
> > 2.4.0, here> and in many prior votes similarly. I'd suggest that section
> > just be> dropped from future votes to avoid it being stale, the people who
> > need> to should already know the voting style (which the ballot format>
> > doesn't entirely cover) so its mostly redundant, and it doesn't seem> like
> > people actually use or read that bit.>> Robbie>
> 
> 



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]