The Apache Qpid (https://qpid.apache.org) community is pleased to
announce the immediate availability of Apache Qpid JMS 1.12.1.
This is the latest release of our newer JMS client supporting the
Advanced Message Queuing Protocol 1.0 (AMQP 1.0, ISO/IEC 19464,
https://www.amqp.org).
The release is
The Apache Qpid (https://qpid.apache.org) community is pleased to
announce the immediate availability of Apache Qpid JMS 2.6.1.
This is the latest release of our newer JMS client supporting the
Advanced Message Queuing Protocol 1.0 (AMQP 1.0, ISO/IEC 19464,
https://www.amqp.org).
Note the 2.x cli
There were 3 binding +1 votes, and no other votes received. The vote has passed.
I will add the files to the dist release repo and release the maven
staging repo shortly, updating the website and announcing after the
release has had time to sync to the CDN and maven central.
-
There were 3 binding +1 votes, and no other votes received. The vote has passed.
I will add the files to the dist release repo and release the maven
staging repo shortly, updating the website and announcing after the
release has had time to sync to the CDN and maven central.
-
On Tue, 17 Sept 2024 at 17:47, Timothy Bish wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I have put together a release candidate for a 1.0.0-M22 Qpid protonJ2
> release,
> please give it a test out and vote accordingly.
>
> The source and binary archives can be grabbed from:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/q
Hi folks,
I have put together a spin for a 2.6.0 Qpid JMS client release,
please give it a test out and vote accordingly.
The staged source and binary archives can be grabbed from:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/qpid/jms/2.6.0-rc1/
The maven artifacts are also staged for now at:
https://
On Fri, 20 Sept 2024 at 18:51, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I have put together a spin for a 1.12.0 Qpid JMS client release,
> please give it a test out and vote accordingly.
>
> The staged source and binary archives can be grabbed from:
> https://dist.apache
On Fri, 20 Sept 2024 at 19:34, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I have put together a spin for a 2.6.0 Qpid JMS client release,
> please give it a test out and vote accordingly.
>
> The staged source and binary archives can be grabbed from:
> https://dist.apache.org
Hi folks,
I have put together a spin for a 1.12.0 Qpid JMS client release,
please give it a test out and vote accordingly.
The staged source and binary archives can be grabbed from:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/qpid/jms/1.12.0-rc1/
The maven artifacts are also staged for now at:
https:
Hi folks,
I have put together a spin for a 1.12.1 Qpid JMS client release,
please give it a test out and vote accordingly.
The staged source and binary archives can be grabbed from:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/qpid/jms/1.12.1-rc1/
The maven artifacts are also staged for now at:
https:
Hi folks,
I have put together a spin for a 2.6.1 Qpid JMS client release,
please give it a test out and vote accordingly.
The staged source and binary archives can be grabbed from:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/qpid/jms/2.6.1-rc1/
The maven artifacts are also staged for now at:
https://
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 at 15:00, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I have put together a spin for a 1.12.1 Qpid JMS client release,
> please give it a test out and vote accordingly.
>
> The staged source and binary archives can be grabbed from:
> https://dist.apache.org
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 at 15:35, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I have put together a spin for a 2.6.1 Qpid JMS client release,
> please give it a test out and vote accordingly.
>
> The staged source and binary archives can be grabbed from:
> https://dist.apache.org
The Apache Qpid (https://qpid.apache.org) community is pleased to
announce the immediate availability of Apache Qpid JMS 1.12.0.
This is the latest release of our newer JMS client supporting the
Advanced Message Queuing Protocol 1.0 (AMQP 1.0, ISO/IEC 19464,
https://www.amqp.org).
The release is
The Apache Qpid (https://qpid.apache.org) community is pleased to
announce the immediate availability of Apache Qpid JMS 2.6.0.
This is the latest release of our newer JMS client supporting the
Advanced Message Queuing Protocol 1.0 (AMQP 1.0, ISO/IEC 19464,
https://www.amqp.org).
Note the 2.x cli
There were 3 binding +1 votes, and no other votes received. The vote has passed.
I will add the files to the dist release repo and release the maven
staging repo shortly, updating the website and announcing after the
release has had time to sync to the CDN and maven central.
-
There were 3 binding +1 votes, and no other votes received. The vote has passed.
I will add the files to the dist release repo and release the maven
staging repo shortly, updating the website and announcing after the
release has had time to sync to the CDN and maven central.
-
Given the question, a more basic starting point might be to indicate
that you can configure the broker via the web management interface:
https://qpid.apache.org/releases/qpid-broker-j-9.2.0/book/Java-Broker-Management-Channel-Web-Console.html
Where you can then define e.g Keystores (and Truststore
Hi folks,
I have put together a first spin for a Qpid Proton 0.40.0 release,
please give it a test out and vote accordingly.
The files can be grabbed from:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/qpid/proton/0.40.0-rc1/
The JIRAs assigned are:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jsp
The Apache Qpid (https://qpid.apache.org) community is pleased to
announce the immediate availability of Apache Qpid Proton 0.40.0.
Apache Qpid Proton is a messaging library for the Advanced Message
Queuing Protocol 1.0 (AMQP 1.0, ISO/IEC 19464, https://www.amqp.org).
It can be used in a wide rang
; I removed the thread sleep from the producer and it now seems to be working
> as expected as in messages are load balanced across the consumers.
> Why would that have a impact on the way the router dispatches messages to
> the consumer ?
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016
Hi folks,
I have put together a spin for a 0.10.0 Qpid JMS client release, please
test it and vote accordingly.
The source and binary archives can be grabbed from here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/qpid/jms/0.10.0-rc1/
Those files and the other maven artifacts are also staged for now a
On 28 June 2016 at 09:06, Keith W wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> A release candidate for the next release (6.0.4) of the Qpid Java
> Components has been created.
>
> The list of changes can be found in Jira:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20QPID%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20qpid-
On 27 June 2016 at 17:33, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I have put together a spin for a 0.10.0 Qpid JMS client release, please
> test it and vote accordingly.
>
> The source and binary archives can be grabbed from here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/de
On 28 June 2016 at 17:00, Dale Green wrote:
> Hi people,
>
> I have a problem using Qpid JMS 0.9 with Service Bus.
>
> The use case is the following:
> I want to create a connection, session, and a queue consumer and receive 0
> or 1 messages within a given timeout. That is, receive(timeout) is ca
is that you look at not consuming only a
single message with each consumer/session/connection, if thats
possible for what you are doing (its generally not advised purely for
how ineffcient it is relative to a long lived consumer).
>
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Robbie Gemmell
&
Hi folks,
As per previous discussion/votes, the reorganised cpp and python bits
will be migrating to their own git repositories. The migration is due
to begin in the next hour or two.
It isn't clear that the svn subdirs will actually be locked at this
time, so please take note to cease committing
On 29 June 2016 at 13:17, Gordon Sim wrote:
> On 27/06/16 17:33, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I have put together a spin for a 0.10.0 Qpid JMS client release, please
>> test it and vote accordingly.
>>
>> The source and binar
On 29 June 2016 at 13:36, Gordon Sim wrote:
> On 29/06/16 13:30, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>
>> Its usiong guest:guest as those are
>> the credentials passed to the connection factory when creating the
>> connection.
>
>
> Doh! I should have realised that. Changi
On 29 June 2016 at 14:11, Gordon Sim wrote:
> On 29/06/16 13:43, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>
>> I did it that way as a way of showing folks how to do authentication
>> when creating the connection from the factory.
>
>
> Which is indeed valuable.
>
>> I persona
On 29 June 2016 at 16:18, Gordon Sim wrote:
> On 29/06/16 14:26, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>
>> On 29 June 2016 at 14:11, Gordon Sim wrote:
>>>
>>> On 29/06/16 13:43, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I personally dislike
>>>>
On 29 June 2016 at 19:43, Gordon Sim wrote:
> On 29/06/16 12:39, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>
>> On 29 June 2016 at 11:08, Dale Green wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>> Closing the consumer explicitly didn't help (it's closed on session close
>>> any
On 29 June 2016 at 19:38, Gordon Sim wrote:
> On 29/06/16 16:52, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>
>> I think I misinterpreted your use of "predefined" earlier. I was only
>> really considering whether I think it makes sense for a client example
>> to use user creden
On 29 June 2016 at 23:08, Gordon Sim wrote:
> On 29/06/16 21:50, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>
>> On 29 June 2016 at 19:43, Gordon Sim wrote:
>>>
>>> On 29/06/16 12:39, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 29 June 2016 at 11:
drain=true'
> , so receive() is blocked forever. However, there are some (probably empty)
> AMQP packets sent after some time, but Qpid doesn't send anything anymore.
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Robbie Gemmell
> wrote:
>
>> On 28 June 2016 at 17:00, Dal
es are still locked for the lock duration.
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 1:13 AM, Robbie Gemmell
> wrote:
>
>> On 29 June 2016 at 11:08, Dale Green wrote:
>> > Hi Robbie,
>> >
>> > Thanks for the hints! I couldn't solve my problems, but let me l
There were 5 binding +1 votes, and no other votes received. The vote has passed.
I will add the archives to the dist release repo and release the maven
staging repo shortly. The website will be updated later after the
artifacts have had time to sync to the mirrors and maven central.
-
On 30 June 2016 at 19:12, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-06-29 at 13:18 +0100, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> As per previous discussion/votes, the reorganised cpp and python bits
>> will be migrating to their own git repositories. The migration is
Hi Dale,
It looks like you might have snipped some of the logs. If you removed
any frame logging we will need to see that too (well, at least what
frames and when) to better reason about what the client is (or is not)
doing, as heartbeat frames are only sent in the absence of other
frames. It woul
The Apache Qpid community is pleased to announce the immediate availability
of Apache Qpid JMS 0.10.0.
This is the tenth release of our newer AMQP 1.0 JMS client, based around
the Qpid Proton protocol engine and implementing the AMQP JMS Mapping
as it evolves at OASIS.
This release addresses vuln
The Apache Qpid community is pleased to announce the immediate availability
of Apache Qpid Java 6.0.4.
This release addresses vulnerability CVE-2016-4974 and incorporates a number
of defect fixes and enhancements.
The release is available now from our website:
http://qpid.apache.org/download.
[CVE-2016-4974] Apache Qpid: deserialization of untrusted input while
using JMS ObjectMessage
Severity: Moderate
Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation
Versions Affected:
Qpid AMQP 0-x JMS client 6.0.3 and earlier
Qpid JMS (AMQP 1.0) client 0.9.0 and earlier
Description:
When applications call
2016-07-04 09:58:56,843 [rifyHost=false]] - TRACE
> AmqpProvider - IdleTimeoutCheck rescheduling with delay:
> 12
> 2016-07-04 09:59:32,164 [ntLoopGroup-2-1] - TRACE
> NettyTcpTransport - New data read: 8 bytes incoming:
> UnpooledHeapByteBuf(ridx: 0, widx: 8, cap: 37)
&g
So, I am still trying to find out what makes Service Bus unhappy.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Robbie Gemmell
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dale,
>>
>> I tried to reproduce this on Friday using the existing idle-timeout
>> tests for the client and wasn't
ith W wrote:
> On 30 June 2016 at 10:45, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>> The repositories that exist were created several days ago for testing
>> purposes, as the migration is unusual given the structure of the svn
>> repo. The actual migration has not actually been performed yet (
2)
>> at
>> org.apache.qpid.jms.provider.amqp.AmqpProvider$17.run(AmqpProvider.java:699)
>> at
>> java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471)
>> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
>> at
>>
On 2 July 2016 at 03:20, Justin Ross wrote:
> Hi, folks. Here is an RC for 0.13.1. Please test and place your vote.
>
> Source distribution:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/qpid/proton/0.13.1-rc/
>
> Maven staging repo:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapa
The migration has been performed, after some issues were resolved.
More details in a new thread shortly.
Robbie
On 5 July 2016 at 09:40, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> No update, I was going to jump on HipChat later to see whats happening
> though since infra asked for this notice to be sen
The migration to the new git repositories have now been performed:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/qpid-cpp.git
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/qpid-python.git
Some additional tasks still need completed now that the migration has
been done. See the JIRAs for further details:
https:
ignore such
> dispositions?
>
> Is there any way to set the credit to 0, send the Dispositions, and then
> Detach?
>
> Thanks!
>
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Robbie Gemmell
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the update. That seems to confirm that theres not much the
&
On 6 July 2016 at 17:50, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> Hi Dale,
>
> It isnt invalid from a protocol perspective, as dispositions only
> actually refer to session-scoped information, not link
> (consumer/producer) scoped information. I deleted an overly
> complicated descripti
On 6 July 2016 at 17:57, Gordon Sim wrote:
> On 06/07/16 17:42, Gordon Sim wrote:
>>
>> On 06/07/16 17:14, Dale Green wrote:
>>>
>>> I have an update on this issue.
>>>
>>> According to Microsoft, state=Released is supported and now I can confirm
>>> that this is true. If the message is released d
On 6 July 2016 at 17:13, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
>
>> NOTE: gpg gave me this:
>>
>> gpg --verify qpid-proton-0.13.1.tar.gz.asc qpid-proton-0.13.1.tar.gz
>> gpg: Signature made Fri 01 Jul 2016 10:08:26 PM EDT using RSA key ID
>> C6B459DB
>> gpg: Good signature from "Justin Ross (CODE SIGNING KEY) >
Hi Artem,
It would be good if you could elaborate more specifically on your use
case, to give us a better idea what it is you are aiming to do and
why, then we might be able to make suggestions.
Robbie
On 8 July 2016 at 08:45, wrote:
> Hi, i need to use protonJ server for broker live data. How
Hi Artem,
I'm afraid I still don't really understand your use case enough from
the limited description. Regardless, my main question would be whether
you really need/want to write your own AMQP 1.0 message broker/server
as your mail suggests, rather than just using one of several existing
availabl
In the case of the Server engine example it uses a single thread for
doing everything from accepting connections to processing all of them
thereafter, so it all needs to be asynchronous or it wouldnt work,
presumably what you are seeing when trying to use blocking operations
within that thread.
As
On 15 July 2016 at 09:16, Justin Ross wrote:
> I've been working with the security pages recently, and there are two
> things I propose.
>
> First, I'd like to simplify the way we include the full CVE content.
> Instead of embedding it in the CVE table as a show/hide element, I'd like
> to link ou
Can you check which versions of proton-j are on the classpath? A
likely related report came up a couple of weeks ago, where someone was
trying to use the JMS client and another client together in the same
VM, but the latter embedded a fairly old version of proton-j which
lacks some newer methods th
>From previous discussion on the subject I believe there are two main
options for interacting with other threads in such manner:
- Use the 'wakeup' functionality from the Selectable used for the
timer, calling reactor.wakeup() to wake the reactor thread from its
selector.select() call if needed, t
On 19 July 2016 at 11:25, DraCzech wrote:
> I've noticed the issue just when I finished the question...
>
> I tried to use proton-j 0.13.1 (as direct dependency) and 0.13.0 (transitive
> dependency of qpid-jms-client 0.10.0)
>
> But it still hangs on the same spot no matter what version of the lib
Providing traces from the other (working) scenario as well would
likely be useful, by comparing the two it could be more obvious what
is upsetting the server.
Robbie
On 19 July 2016 at 10:58, Tobias Duckworth wrote:
> Thanks, wasn't aware of PN_TRACE_FRM, here's some output from connecting to
>
I dont think the version of proton-j used by ActiveMQ should be an
issue. The 0.10.0 client uses that broker/client version in some of
its tests, and the broker test suite uses the 0.9.0 client, so they
should run together.
The only thing I notice from the partial tree info that directly
relates t
On 19 July 2016 at 15:11, DraCzech wrote:
> URI given to the client JmsConnectionFactory:
> amqps://boxmessagehub.azure-devices.net:5671
>
> And it should work fine with qpid JMS client (tested separately and seems to
> be OK)
>
> I pass the amqp.idleTimeout=12 property straight to the
> JmsCo
On 19 July 2016 at 16:02, DraCzech wrote:
> I don't think the problem could be caused by old slf4j dependency. Even if I
> try the newest version, the problem remains the same.
>
> If it helps I can paste complete dependency tree. Last time I just left out
> stuff made by our company and posted on
Glasd you found the first issue. As I say, we'll look to improve the
clients handling in situations such as that.
If you are seeing the below exception though it means that the AMQP
connection has been opened and then remotely closed by the server,
seemingly without giving a specific description o
The only thing I have seen mentioned for some of the Microsoft
services is needing to increase idleTimeout as they require the
advertised value requested from the client to be above a certain
value. The client defaults to a 60sec idle timeout, and so as can be
seen in your trace advertises/requests
Some more comparative traces may (or may not) help folks advise,
possibly even some example code to go with it.
On 20 July 2016 at 11:34, Tobias Duckworth wrote:
> Yes, so just to clarify...
>
> Azure is sending a response to my message authenticating with the hub, and
> the behaviour is differen
service-bus-amqp-protocol-guide/
>
> Looks like they have different opinion about the Disposition frames.
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell
> wrote:
>
>> On 6 July 2016 at 17:57, Gordon Sim wrote:
>> > On 06/07/16 17:42, Gordon Sim wrote:
>
It there are fixes available, it makes sense to release them. If they
are important, all the more reason :)
Robbie
On 26 July 2016 at 15:09, Ted Ross wrote:
> As we work toward qpid-dispatch-router 0.7.0, there are a couple of
> important completed fixes that are appropriate for an interim minor
On 25 July 2016 at 11:09, Chaouki Dhib wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm building a web application that uses Spring and is deployed on a
> Tomcat 8.0 server. In the application, I have successfully integrated
> Qpid JMS (using Spring JMS) to both send messages (by jmsTemplate) and
> receive messages (by De
ActiveMQ 5.9.0 is rather old and its AMQP 1.0 support was fairly
recent at the time, its changed a lot since then. You'll want to try a
newer version. 5.13.4 is the current, with 5.14.0 currently under vote
for release.
On 3 August 2016 at 14:37, eric73 wrote:
> Hello Sim,
> I use Apache ActiveMQ
On 3 August 2016 at 15:52, Gordon Sim wrote:
> On 03/08/16 15:13, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>
>> ActiveMQ 5.9.0 is rather old and its AMQP 1.0 support was fairly
>> recent at the time, its changed a lot since then. You'll want to try a
>> newer version. 5.13.4 is th
On 3 August 2016 at 17:37, Jakub Scholz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When I have listener configured like this:
>
> listener {
> role: normal
> host: 0.0.0.0
> port: amqp
> saslMechanisms: PLAIN DIGEST-MD5 CRAM-MD5
> linkCapacity: 1000
> }
>
> Is it really expected that it allows anonymous
On 3 August 2016 at 18:08, Gordon Sim wrote:
> On 03/08/16 17:54, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>
>> On 3 August 2016 at 17:37, Jakub Scholz wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> When I have listener configured like this:
>>>
>>> lis
I havent seen the code Ulf is using, but I would guess...edit: ninja'd
by Ulf while I was looking at something else, deleted ;)
The reactor Ulf is using is a good bit lower level and has a
significantly different threading and application usage model than the
JMS client, so they will differ a good
>
> Even if we don't change the default value, we should at least improve the
> documentation. Right now there is not much about configuring the listeners
> in a "secure way". I will raise a JIRA and try to prepare something for the
> docu.
>
> On Wed, Aug 3,
On 2 August 2016 at 14:17, Ted Ross wrote:
> This is the vote thread for Qpid Dispatch Router 0.6.1 (RC1). Please test
> and vote:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/qpid/dispatch/0.6.1-rc1/
>
> Changes since 0.6.0:
>
> DISPATCH-341 - router did not respond to request to drain a messa
absent or false.
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Robbie Gemmell"
>> To: users@qpid.apache.org
>> Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2016 6:06:34 AM
>> Subject: Re: Dispatch: Default value of authenticatePeer
>>
>> One could definitely argue
I tried the staged proton-j bits out with the qpid-jms-client and
activemq master build/tests, no issues.
Robbie
On 2 August 2016 at 14:50, Justin Ross wrote:
> http://home.apache.org/~jross/misc/qpid-proton-0.14.0-beta-test-output.txt
>
> My tests of qpid-proton, -dispatch, -jms, and -cpp on Fe
+1
I checked the RC out as follows:
- Verified the sig and checksum files.
- Checked LICENCE+NOTICE files present.
- Ran the CMake build+tests.
- Ran the Maven build+tests.
- Used the staging repo to run the Qpid JMS client master build+tests.
- Used the staging repo to run the ActiveMQ mast
+1
I checked the RC out as follows:
- Verified the sig and checksum files.
- Checked LICENCE+NOTICE files present.
- Ran the hello example against the 6.0.4 Java broker.
Robbie
On 17 August 2016 at 15:09, Justin Ross wrote:
> The artifacts proposed for release:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/
Its best if you start a new thread for new discussions, that way
unrelated issues get their own thread and it is easier for people to
follow / join in / find later etc.
:P
Robbie
On 24 August 2016 at 12:49, lucas wrote:
> hi,Ted Ross.
> I have some questions about dispatch.I use it lasterday a
On 29 August 2016 at 14:30, Matt Broadstone wrote:
>
> That's unfortunate. Do you have a timeline for the next release?
>
As has been said, this last cycle was unusually long. It was combined
with reorganising the various components and migrating repositories
etc, and that took longer than desir
On 27 August 2016 at 00:18, Justin Ross wrote:
> The artifacts proposed for release:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/qpid/cpp/1.35.0-rc/
>
> Please indicate your vote below. If you favor releasing the 1.35.0 RC bits
> as 1.35.0 GA, vote +1. If you have reason to think the RC is not
Hi folks,
Just a heads up that I'll be looking at doing a 0.11.0 JMS client
release next week, likely cutting earlier in the week to hopefully
allow completing later in the week.
Beyond that, I'll likely skip master a little up to 0.20.0-SNAPSHOT so
it can begin taking work on implementing JMS 2
Hi folks,
I have put together a spin for a 0.11.0 Qpid JMS client release, please
test it and vote accordingly.
The source and binary archives can be grabbed from:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/qpid/jms/0.11.0-rc1/
Those files and the other maven artifacts are also staged for now at:
ht
Hi Kai,
While im inbetween coughs and sneezes here...
I'm not sure I understand the question. If you could expand a bit it
may help, and perhaps elaborate on what code or behaviour is giving
the impression.
It might not once I better understand, but for now this seems more
suited for the Vert.x
-j itself it would things transition here.
If you have a reproducer I'd suggest debugging what differs between
the success and failure case and perhaps giving details (and even the
reproducer) on a vertx issue.
Robbie
On 7 September 2016 at 17:15, Hudalla Kai (INST/ESY1)
wrote:
> On Mi, 2016-09-
I believe the 'Qpid-proton-c' Jenkins job is tied to this node becuse
it wouldnt run on the other newer nodes. Can someone take a look at
getting infra to install whats needed on the other nodes (should be
easier these days due to the very stuff making them retire the old
node), or even using docke
On 5 September 2016 at 16:47, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I have put together a spin for a 0.11.0 Qpid JMS client release, please
> test it and vote accordingly.
>
> The source and binary archives can be grabbed from:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/de
There were 5 binding +1 votes, and no other votes received. The vote has passed.
I will add the archives to the dist release repo and release the maven
staging repo shortly. The website will be updated later after the
artifacts have had time to sync to the mirrors and maven central.
Robbie
-
The Apache Qpid (http://qpid.apache.org) community is pleased to announce
the immediate availability of Apache Qpid JMS 0.11.0.
This is the eleventh release of our newer JMS client supporting the
Advanced Message Queuing Protocol 1.0 (AMQP 1.0, ISO/IEC 19464,
http://www.amqp.org), based round the
I'm guesing when you say proton-j that you mean Messenger specifically?
The proton-j engine has support for AMQP heartbeating/idle-timeout (with
Artemis using that), and the Proton-J Reactor bits look to utilize that
support (so it should send them automatically if needed), but from grep of
the co
The initial cmake step outputs a message if you are using a newer
version of proton than was marked as tested at the time of the cpp
bits being released, also detailing which version was. Given the age
of the 0.30 release, it looks like it was Proton 0.7 it was released
after, though that doesn't m
I can't lend any assistance on the code side, but on the version
number...0.31 was the name for the stream of development resulting in
the 0.32 release, which confusingly enough contains anything
referencing 0.31 or 0.32. We've stopped using that naming style for
any of the releases now.
Robbie
O
ms out. I may post an inquiry
> to the community regarding the use of Google mock.
>
> Thanks
>
> Paul
>
> ____
> From: Robbie Gemmell
> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 3:03 AM
> To: users@qpid.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Hel
Another option than the below could also to be look at using the
brokers HTTP management interface.
On 27 September 2016 at 16:30, Rob Godfrey wrote:
> Hi Dominik,
>
> AMQP 1.0 doesn't define a way of creating queues through the core
> protocol - that will be in the future management specificatio
tion?
>
> -K
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Alan Conway"
>> To: d...@qpid.apache.org
>> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 9:11:51 AM
>> Subject: Re: API and terms: idle-time-out and heartbeat intervals.
>>
>> On Wed, 2016-09-28 at 22:33 +0100
Hi folks,
I have put together a spin for a 0.11.1 Qpid JMS client release, please
test it and vote accordingly.
There are a few small changes included:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314524&version=12338292
The source and binary archives can be grabbed from:
h
On 30 September 2016 at 16:24, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I have put together a spin for a 0.11.1 Qpid JMS client release, please
> test it and vote accordingly.
>
> There are a few small changes included:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.js
1 - 100 of 2327 matches
Mail list logo
