Adam Ralph

@raytangRT I'm the wrong person to ask, since I've never even used AxoCover. I'm only following this issue because of this: https://github.com/xbehave/xbehave.net/issues/434#issuecomment-386868043 However, to my knowledge, AxoCover only supports xunit...

Withdrawing. We've discussed this a few times and the consensus seems to be that we need complete control certain settings to ensure correct functioning of the transport, so only some...

@SimonCropp > cant those certain settings be verified and all other settings free to change On the face of it, that sound reasonable. @Particular/rabbitmq-transport-maintainers thoughts?

👍 thanks for raising @mauroservienti. I've renamed to reflect this as a new "feature".

As @Particular/rabbitmq-transport-maintainers discussed today, we will solve this by assuming that the management API is available only via HTTPS when the connection string has `UseTLS=true`. This should cover virtually all...

Interesting. Do we know if/how this is exposed in the RabbitMQ client nupkg?

It seems this is exposed via the current client. We could perhaps add support for it in `DirectRoutingTopology`.

I'd like to validate Priority Queue Support as the solution for the customer scenario mentioned. @Particular/rabbitmq-transport-maintainers I propose we have a quick call with @ramonsmits about this next week so...

Hi @NArnott, sorry for the delay. In your scenario we usually recommend splitting the handlers/sagas across endpoints appropriately. E.g. if you have contention between a saga and a stateless handler,...

Requiring a topology choice has been split off into #427 which means this issue no longer requires a breaking change. It remains on the 5.0.0 milestone for now, but we...