that's certainly an option. however, i'm sure that my company will have some reluctance to rush to production on a *.0 release. this is a rather critical application with human safety implications so decisions to adopt new versions are conservative.
rajdavies wrote: > > you don't want to use activemq 5.0 ? > On Jan 8, 2008, at 6:34 PM, gfrank wrote: > >> >> Is there a schedule on this? >> >> I'm interested because there are some critical fixes since 4.1.1 >> related to >> master/slave and JDBC message store. My company is reluctant to go to >> production with a locally compiled binary from the activemq source >> tree. >> >> Thanks, >> Greg >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/next-binary-release-of-4.x--tp14695876s2354p14695876.html >> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/next-binary-release-of-4.x--tp14695876s2354p14720315.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
