Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cxf.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cxf.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of ashakirin@talend.com designates
 64.95.72.213 as permitted sender)
From: Andrei Shakirin <ashakirin@talend.com>
To: "dev@cxf.apache.org" <dev@cxf.apache.org>
Subject: =?Windows-1252?Q?RE:_Thoughts_about_a_2.8_release_(or_not)=85?=
Thread-Topic: =?Windows-1252?Q?Thoughts_about_a_2.8_release_(or_not)=85?=
Thread-Index: AQHOKYVG8XaU5zojQk+PHnc2i0FUkJi5qqYA
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:24:24 +0000
Message-ID: <D225CD69196F3F4A9F4174B2FCA06F88117597D1@S10BE002.SH10.lan>
References: <DE08719B-6A4B-4914-A410-789CBC4A08E8@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <DE08719B-6A4B-4914-A410-789CBC4A08E8@apache.org>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0

+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.

Regards,
Andrei.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:dkulp@apache.org]
> Sent: Montag, 25. M=E4rz 2013 19:19
> To: dev@cxf.apache.org
> Subject: Thoughts about a 2.8 release (or not)=85
>=20
>=20
> 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.   T=
he
> 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 co=
mpat
> issues to resolve if it would go on a 2.x line)
>=20
> 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 rele=
ase
> 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.
>=20
> 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 i=
n 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 b=
igger
> things for our Oct/Nov release.  Possibly make that a CXF 3.0 release ins=
tead
> 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=85    We c=
an
> 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 s=
o to get
> people looking at it and testing with it.
>=20
> Any thoughts?
>=20
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog Talend Community Coder -
> http://coders.talend.com