git.net

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [VOTE] Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.6.0


I'd say the same. It is essentially the same amount of work to respin
as it is to do another release, and it isnt a regression in this
release, so I'd personally proceed and just use this as reason to do a
quick 2.6.1 along with any other approriate fixes.

Robbie

On 19 May 2018 at 15:27, Timothy Bish <tabish121@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 05/18/2018 06:24 PM, Michael André Pearce wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> On upgrading to 2.5.0 we have found quite a blocking issue to 2.5.0 for
>> anyone who secures durable queue creation so clients cannot create, but
>> doesn’t secure non-durable.
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-1872
>>
>> In summary prior to 2.5.0 the security check incorrectly always checked
>> for security rights for non-durable, even if the queue was a durable, this
>> was security hole was fixed in 2.5.0, but a knock on effect is it has
>> highlighted/exposed some logic issues in the CoreClient and also in AMQP and
>> OpenWire protocol managers, where in some cases a queue is not check for
>> being present before calling create queue, meaning if user is not allowed to
>> create a queue, but is allowed to consume, and the queue exists, the client
>> still cannot consume, as the code tries to create and throws exception.
>>
>> We have created a test case that re-creates the issues, and also a
>> possible solution its in PR here.
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2093
>>
>> Whilst it is not technically caused by any changes in the just created RC
>> for 2.6.0 since 2.5.0, i think the severity/impact of this may deem it
>> worthy to fix, and re-spin.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Mike
>
>
> This seems like a good opportunity to practice turning around a quick 2.6.1
> release as this is not a blocking issue given it's been in the code for
> quite some time already.
>
>
>
>>> On 17 May 2018, at 20:02, Christopher Shannon
>>> <christopher.l.shannon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 2:51 PM, Timothy Bish <tabish121@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 05/16/2018 10:49 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.6.0 release.
>>>>>
>>>>> The release notes can be found here:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?versi
>>>>> on=12342903&&projectId=12315920
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a new commits report I made that I'm introducing on this
>>>>> release:
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/activemq/activemq-art
>>>>> emis/2.6.0/artemis-2.6.0.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Source and binary distributions can be found here:
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/activemq/activemq-artemis/2.6.0
>>>>>
>>>>> The Maven repository is here:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheactivemq-1157
>>>>>
>>>>> In case you want to give it a try with the maven repo on examples:
>>>>> http://activemq.apache.org/artemis/docs/latest/hacking-guide
>>>>> /validating-releases.html
>>>>>
>>>>> The source tag:
>>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=activemq-artemis.g
>>>>> it;a=tag;h=refs/tags/2.6.0
>>>>>
>>>>> 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)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's my +1
>>>>> .
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> * Validate the signatures and checksums
>>>> * Review license and notice files in the archives
>>>> * Build from source and ran some of the tests
>>>> * Ran binary broker and ran some samples and performance tests against
>>>> it
>>>> * Used mvn apache-rat:check to validate license headers in place
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Tim Bish
>>>> twitter: @tabish121
>>>> blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
> --
> Tim Bish
> twitter: @tabish121
> blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/
>