cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrei Shakirin <>
Subject RE: Thoughts about a 2.8 release (or not)…
Date Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:24:24 GMT
+1 for skipping 2.8 and releasing 3.0 end of this year.

@Sergei: let us to discuss how I could help with 2.0 TCK.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Kulp []
> Sent: Montag, 25. März 2013 19:19
> To:
> Subject: Thoughts about a 2.8 release (or not)…
> 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
> - Talend Community Coder -

View raw message