cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig Tataryn <crai...@tataryn.net>
Subject Re: To spring 3 or not to spring 3
Date Sat, 17 Jul 2010 18:32:45 GMT

On 2010-07-17, at 11:00 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:

> On Saturday 17 July 2010 11:11:03 am Craig Tataryn wrote:
>> I think +1 for Spring 3, if a company is going to make the leap to CXF 2.3,
>> they are probably willing to make the jump to Spring 3.0.
>> 
>> Would there actually be any @since 3.0 features you'd use from Spring?  Or
>> would it be possible they could still operate with 2.5.6 by doing maven
>> excludes on the 3.0 transient deps?
> 
> Right now, we default to Spring 2.5.6, but we have a profile for testing with 
> 3.0.   We most likely would just reverse that.   Thus, at THIS point, you 
> could easily exclude 3 and use 2.5.6.    We could probably setup a build in 
> Hudson to use the spring 2 profile to make sure it would work.  
> 
>> No comment on Jetty, I only use Jett for testing purposes and not for
>> actually deploying too so I think even if there was something with Jetty 7
>> which was screwing me up I could still continue BAU with say Tomcat.
> 
> That would be the goal.    The one "tricky" thing is that I might need to 
> update the servlet-api to 3.0 for Jetty, but I need to test to make sure that 
> won't break things when running in a 2.5 container.   I'll comment more about 
> this in Benson's thread about jetty 7 in a bit.
> 

Now *that* I could see being a problem because of "legacy" containers which might be running
CXF. *cough* WAS 6.1 *cough*

Craig.


> Dan
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> Craig.
>> 
>> On 2010-07-17, at 6:23 AM, Cyrille Le Clerc wrote:
>>> +1 for upgrading to Spring 3 and Jetty 7.
>>> 
>>> Cyrille
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 11:14 PM, Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Since we are getting close to having 2.3 ready to release, I'm kind of
>>>> looking at the various deps to see if there are updates we should grab
>>>> or not. Things like woodstox and abdera and such are pretty much
>>>> no-brainers.
>>>> 
>>>> The two main contention points are:
>>>> 1) Jetty from 6 to 7- Benson has started investigating this.     This
>>>> DOES involve some code changes as the Jetty packages and stuff have
>>>> changed. Thus, the http-jetty transport would be incompatible with
>>>> Jetty 6.   However, it would give us some potential new features such
>>>> as support for continuations on HTTPs. (I think)
>>>> 
>>>> 2) Spring - should we use 3.0.0 instead of 2.5.6?    I think the answer
>>>> for this is "go ahead".   We've already have profiles to test this and
>>>> the same code seems to work OK with 2.5.6 and 3.0.0.   Just want to
>>>> double check with folks though.
>>>> 
>>>> I'd like to hear peoples thoughts on those.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Daniel Kulp
>>>> dkulp@apache.org
>>>> http://dankulp.com/blog
> 
> -- 
> Daniel Kulp
> dkulp@apache.org
> http://dankulp.com/blog


Mime
View raw message