Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cxf.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cxf.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
From: Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org>
To: dev@cxf.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Branch for 2.6.x, trunk thoughts...
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2012 15:55:26 -0400
Message-ID: <1591339.LMuTN6XARp@dilbert.dankulp.com>
User-Agent: KMail/4.8.3 (Linux/3.2.2; KDE/4.8.3; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <5852459.LA31RllgQJ@dilbert.dankulp.com>
References: <5852459.LA31RllgQJ@dilbert.dankulp.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


Not really much of a discussion, but no objections either.  Thus, I'll go 
ahead and create the branch.  :-)

Dan


On Friday, June 01, 2012 11:10:26 AM Daniel Kulp wrote:
> With 2.6.1 hopefully going out shortly, I'd like to get peoples thoughts
> about creating a 2.6.x-fixes branch and changing trunk to target 2.7. 
> Here is a list of some things I'd like to start thinking about for 2.7:
> 
> 1)  Drop support for Java 5 - this may be a bit contentious.  :-)  It
> would simplify the poms a little bit, allow use of @Override, remove some
> jars from the lib dir, etc... The bigger issue is that several of the
> things we test with and depend on are now Java 6+ such as ActiveMQ and
> gwt and such so we've been stuck on older versions.
> 
> 2) Async http client - this is been on my "maybe next version of CXF" for
> quite a while.  Since 2.3.x I think.   Maybe I'll actually get to it.  
> :-) Would definitely help with some of the Camel integration scenarios.
> 
> 3) WS-Discovery - really two parts to this.   Runtime support to broadcast
> availability and discover endpoints is the first part.   Second part MAY
> be a simple WS-Discovery proxy service for /services.
> 
> 4) SOAP/UDP - Required for #3.
> 
> 5) Possible re-write of the http-jetty transport to base it off the
> Servlet transport or similar so it can take more advantage of things like
> the services list, etc...   Additionally, that may make it easier to
> create an http-tomcat transport (which people DID ask about at CamelOne
> BTW).
> 
> Those are the things *I've* been thinking on and off about.  Obviously the
> other folks around here may have additional things.    I'm sure Colm has
> some security things, Sergey has some REST things, etc....  :-)
> 
> So I guess the big question is: anyone OBJECT to creating the 2.6.x-fixes
> branch now?
-- 
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com