|
|
| Author |
Message |
|
| Guest |
 Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 3:16 pm |
 |
|
|
Guest
|
The RabbitMQ team is pleased to announce the release of RabbitMQ 1.7.0
This release has 'beta' status and introduces a number of new
features, such as native SSL support, a plugin mechanism, and a
Windows installer for the .net client. There are also improvements to
error reporting and diagnostics, performance and stability, the
windows bundle (which now includes the .net client and a more recent
version of Erlang/OTP), server installation and
configuration. Finally, there are a number of small bug fixes.
For details see the attached release notes.
Binary and source distributions of the new release can be found in the
usual place, at http://www.rabbitmq.com/download.html
We recommend that all users of earlier versions of RabbitMQ upgrade to
this latest release.
As always, we welcome any questions, bug reports, and other feedback
on this release, as well as general suggestions for features and
enhancements in future releases. Mail us via the RabbitMQ discussion
list at rabbitmq-discuss@lists.rabbitmq.com, or directly at
info@rabbitmq.com.
Regards,
The RabbitMQ Team
Post received from mailinglist |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 12:34 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
> Finally, there are a number of small bug fixes.
Will the bug fixes be ported to the still beta 1.6 branch? When will
the 1.6 branch go into 'final' status?
> We recommend that all users of earlier versions of RabbitMQ upgrade to
this latest release.
Are you making this recommendation, even if the 1.7 status is beta?
Thanks,
Michael
_______________________________________________
rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
rabbitmq-discuss@lists.rabbitmq.com
http://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss
Post received from mailinglist |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:21 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Michael
Thank-you for your questions. The way we use 'beta' is perhaps
slightly different from the expectation implied in your post. We'd
love any advice you have on this and how to make our language clearer.
We have a reasonably frequent release cycle, making a 1.x release on
average every 3-4 months. Sometimes there are even shorter gaps
between releases. We have a pretty thorough QA process for these
releases, and push as many bug fixes into them as we can. This is why
we recommend that people upgrade. The "beta" status reflects the fact
that our QA process may not have caught everything, Some users may
want to wait a few weeks (or longer) to see how others get on.
So we should probably have declared 1.6 "stable" by now. It is
certainly seen as a stable release based on feedback. But, it's never
going to contain all the changes that went into 1.7.
We are constrained in how many versions we can support, so the 1.x
upgrades will be the norm for the time being, rather than 1.x.y drops
every few weeks. We can support specific builds commercially.
Please can you let us know what you think of this. As I say, we want
to make everything clearer and better.
alexis
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 1:33 AM, Michael Vierling
<MVierling@attinteractive.com> wrote:
>> Finally, there are a number of small bug fixes.
>
> Will the bug fixes be ported to the still beta 1.6 branch? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
All times are GMT
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Digg It
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Facebook
Stumble Upon
Technorati
