cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Status of 2.5.0 release.....
Date Fri, 28 Oct 2011 17:31:29 GMT
On Friday, October 28, 2011 10:41:20 AM Johan Edstrom wrote:
> I'd like to see this going out - since JBI isn't part of the release anymore
> the SMX trains would need some work anyways, right?

Yea.   That's why I didn't mention the SMX OSGi test suite when testing 2.5.1.   
I'm pretty sure it won't even run.    The Camel OSGi test suite runs (I think) 
and the camel-cxf component runs and tests fine with 2.5.0.  The camel-cxf-
transport has a jbi dependency in there for testing which needs to be removed.  

Dan

> 
> If the 2.4.4 release is "waiting" on smx, what is the problem with picking
> up  2.5.1/2.5.2 later? - why hold up 2.5.0?
> 
> /je
> 
> On Oct 28, 2011, at 10:02 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> > Just wanted to follow up with a bit more of an explanation and
> > reasoning.
> > 
> > Over the last couple months, I've really discovered that updating the
> > OSGi deps in CXF is very risky.   For regular dependencies, the CXF
> > test suite does a very good job of pounding on things to make sure the
> > new versions of the dependencies actually work well and don't break
> > things.    However, to say the OSGi testing in CXF is "lacking" is
> > actually an overstatement.   It's non- existent.     We don't have a
> > single OSGi based test in CXF.
> > 
> > Due to all the new OSGi features and such in 2.5, I don't want to update
> > the OSGi deps and do a release without being able to run several full
> > OSGi based suites on it.  That would include the Camel OSGi things, but
> > would also include all the stuff we've built up in Talend and I'd hope
> > the Fuse guys would do the same.     Since I'm going to be spending
> > next week preparing presentations for ApacheCon and the following week
> > at ApacheCon, it doesn't seem like this would be a 2-3 day delay.  It's
> > more like 2-3 weeks.   Thus, I'd greatly prefer to get the "known good"
> > stuff out now, then follow up with 2.5.1 when we have the time to
> > really test that.  There is enough "new stuff" in 2.5.0 that provides
> > risk factors.  Lets limit this one if we don't have to.
> > 
> > Since ServiceMix is not looking to use 2.5.0, it's less critical to have
> > these specific bundles in 2.5.0 for them.
> > 
> > 
> > Dan
> > 
> > On Friday, October 28, 2011 10:56:15 AM Daniel Kulp wrote:
> >> On Friday, October 28, 2011 9:13:41 AM Freeman Fang wrote:
> >>> Many thanks Dan.
> >>> 
> >>> FYI, Gert will do a servicemix spec 1.9.0  and bundles  release
> >>> tomorrow,  how about you hold CXF release for another 3 or 4 days so
> >>> that
> >>> CXF features.xml also use servicemix spec 1.9.0 and new saaj-
> >>> impl-1.3.9 which has the fix for JDK5?
> >> 
> >> For 2.4.4, sure.  I have no problem waiting a bit longer for that one.
> >> Since I'm really just doing that one for SMX, I'm definitely OK with
> >> deferring that until they have all the pieces in place to help make
> >> them
> >> successful.  I won't do this one today.   Not a problem.   Saves me
> >> some
> >> time today.  :-)
> >> 
> >> 
> >> For 2.5.0, no.   I (and the team at Talend) have done a TON of testing
> >> in OSGi using the current bundle set.   We've spent the last month
> >> identifying issues, figuring out the intricacies of getting it all
> >> working together, etc...   I'd much rather get the current known
> >> working stuff out there and then go back and retest with the new sets
> >> and do a 2.5.1.   I have absolutely no problem doing a 2.5.1 in a few
> >> weeks with this and any other fixes.   But we've held up the release
> >> long enough, IMO, and I want to get it out there.   I was hoping to
> >> get it out several weeks ago.   Already way behind what I had hoped
> >> for. Release sooner.  Release often.   :-)
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Dan
> >> 
> >>> Regards
> >>> Freeman
> >>> 
> >>> On 2011-10-28, at 上午4:23, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> >>>> Just a reminder that I plan on doing the 2.4.4 and 2.5.0 releases
> >>>> tomorrow.
> >>>> 
> >>>> :-)
> >>>> 
> >>>> Dan
> >>>> 
> >>>> On Monday, October 24, 2011 4:50:16 PM Daniel Kulp wrote:
> >>>>> Early this month, we talked about getting 2.5.0 out this month.
> >>>>> Since
> >>>>> then, we've made fairly good progress.  The WS-Notification
> >>>>> stuff
> >>>>> is in
> >>>>> (and I just created a simple sample showing it).   The STS is
> >>>>> in.
> >>>>> WS-MEX
> >>>>> is in.   A ton of OSGi testing and enhancements have gone in.  
> >>>>> I
> >>>>> really
> >>>>> think things are "very close".
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> I currently have one issue that I'd like to fix, but it's really
> >>>>> a
> >>>>> "nice to
> >>>>> have" and I wouldn't block on it.   Basically, the saaj-impl
> >>>>> Karaf
> >>>>> feature
> >>>>> doesn't work on Java 5.   That requires a new release of the
> >>>>> bundle
> >>>>> from
> >>>>> SMX. I was hoping to chat with JB about that today, but haven't
> >>>>> been able
> >>>>> to get a hold of him.   In any case, not something I'd mark
> >>>>> critical for
> >>>>> 2.5 since the 2.4.x Karaf descriptors haven't been installable
> >>>>> on
> >>>>> Java 5
> >>>>> for quite some time and no-one really noticed.    :-)
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Thus, I'm thinking about doing the 2.5.0 release later this
> >>>>> week.
> >>>>> If
> >>>>> anyone has any other things they are working on and can get done
> >>>>> by
> >>>>> then,
> >>>>> please speak up.    Also, any testing, doc updates, etc... are
> >>>>> more
> >>>>> than
> >>>>> appreciated.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Also, I'll likely do a 2.4.4 release at the same time.   There
> >>>>> is
> >>>>> a
> >>>>> bug in
> >>>>> 2.4.3 that prevents the osgi http transport and the JMX
> >>>>> management
> >>>>> from
> >>>>> working with Felix.   Since SMX uses Felix by default, it's
> >>>>> definitely an
> >>>>> issue for them.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Is everyone in agreement with that plan?   Any other thoughts or
> >>>>> questions
> >>>>> or concerns?   Keep in mind, there is always 2.5.1.   :-)
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Thanks!
> >>> 
> >>> ---------------------------------------------
> >>> Freeman Fang
> >>> 
> >>> FuseSource
> >>> Email:ffang@fusesource.com
> >>> Web: fusesource.com
> >>> Twitter: freemanfang
> >>> Blog: http://freemanfang.blogspot.com
-- 
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://dankulp.com/blog
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Mime
View raw message