cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Colm O hEigeartaigh <cohei...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Thoughts about a 2.8 release (or not)…
Date Tue, 26 Mar 2013 10:25:49 GMT
I'm also +1 with this. I would like to merge the WSS4J 2.0 branch to trunk
and switch trunk to be 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT.

Colm.

On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 2:10 AM, Freeman Fang <freeman.fang@gmail.com>wrote:

> +1 for skipping 2.8 now and releasing 3.0 end of this year.
> -------------
> Freeman(Yue) Fang
>
> Red Hat, Inc.
> FuseSource is now part of Red Hat
> Web: http://fusesource.com | http://www.redhat.com/
> Twitter: freemanfang
> Blog: http://freemanfang.blogspot.com
> http://blog.sina.com.cn/u/1473905042
> weibo: @Freeman小屋
>
> On 2013-3-26, at 上午2:19, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
> >
> > We're getting close to April which normally would be the next release
> (2.8).   However, looking things over, I'm not sure it makes sense at this
> time.    Looking at trunk, the only major change (which is admittedly a big
> one), is updating the JAX-RS 2.0 stuff from m10  to the RC level.
> However, it's not complete yet.   Almost everything else has been back
> ported to 2.7.x.   The other major chunk of work that is happening is on
> the wss4j2 branch, but that isn't ready for for release yet either.   (and
> has some backwards compat issues to resolve if it would go on a 2.x line)
> >
> > According to the agreements Apache has with Oracle, we really cannot
> "release" code that doesn't pass the TCK (which the 2.0 works would not).
> Technically, we should not have released 2.7.0 as a release.  We can
> release things like "tech previews" or "beta" or similar, but not a full
> release.   Since we are working on trying to renew the agreements, Oracle
> is paying attention to us pretty closely right now.
> >
> > So, what am I getting at?   In order to release 2.8 in a few weeks, we'd
> either need to back out all the JAX-RS 2.0 stuff to 1.1 level OR everyone
> jump in full force and get it to pass the TCK.   I really don't see either
> happening.   Backing out to 1.1 would be silly and the 2.0 TCK stuff is a
> ton of work.   Thus, my suggestion would be to skip a big release this
> April and concentrate on bigger things for our Oct/Nov release.  Possibly
> make that a CXF 3.0 release instead of 2.8 where we can clean up some
> stuff, break a few things (like change the couple API's that currently
> force WSDL4J on JAX-RS users), etc…    We can incorporate the WSS4J2
> changes as part of this as well.    If we go this route, we could likely
> start a series of "beta" releases or similar in June or so to get people
> looking at it and testing with it.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Kulp
> > dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
> > Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
> >
>
>


-- 
Colm O hEigeartaigh

Talend Community Coder
http://coders.talend.com

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message