cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aki Yoshida <elak...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ehcache version used in cxf build
Date Wed, 10 Jul 2013 15:46:19 GMT
okay. then i'll wait for you.

2013/7/7 Jason Pell <jason@pellcorp.com>:
> I might have time end of next week so leave with me for the moment.
>
> On Jul 7, 2013 6:54 AM, "Aki Yoshida" <elakito@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jason,
>>
>> I wanted to have a patched snapshot sometime next week. But I am not
>> around in the beginning of the next week, so I was wondering if you wanted
>> to work on it in the next few days :-). But if you can't find time next
>> week, I can look at it next week then.
>>
>> regards, aki
>>
>>
>> 2013/7/5 Jason Pell <jason@pellcorp.com>
>>>
>>> It depends when you need it done :-)
>>>
>>> Its been on my list of todos for a long time and i am flat out on my day
>>> job with other stuff. Might be able to look at it in a few weeks.
>>>
>>> On Jul 5, 2013 10:46 PM, "Aki Yoshida" <elakito@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Colm, all,
>>>>
>>>> My mind has been going back and forth :-(
>>>>
>>>> I think we should make cxf 2.7.x, et al use a reflection based method so
>>>> that we can use either ehcache 2.5.1 or a higher version at runtime. If we
>>>> don't do this and either stick to the current 2.5.1 usage or switch to the
>>>> new 2.5.2 usage, we will have to set its ehcache range to either
>>>> [2.5.0,2.5.1] or [2.5.2,3.0.0), and that will look sad.
>>>>
>>>> For cxf trunk, we can update its compile time dependency to ehcache
>>>> 2.7.2 and since the code change has to go into 2.7,x, we can also include
>>>> this change for rt/rs/security/sso/saml that uses the create method. And
we
>>>> need an equivalent change in wss4j trunk to be consistent.
>>>>
>>>> @Jason,
>>>> Will you be doing the change for cxf or shall I do it or help you some
>>>> part? Let me know.
>>>>
>>>> thanks.
>>>> aki
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2013/7/5 Colm O hEigeartaigh <coheigea@apache.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Aki,
>>>>>
>>>>> EHCacheManagerHolder has only been moved to WSS4J trunk and so only
>>>>> affects
>>>>> CXF trunk. It still exists in CXF 2.7.x. I think you are probably
>>>>> right,
>>>>> and that we should only upgrade EhCache for CXF trunk and not 2.7.x.
>>>>>
>>>>> Colm.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Aki Yoshida <elakito@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > I just noticed that EHCacheManagerHolder used in cxf trunk has been
>>>>> > moved
>>>>> > to wss4j-ws-security-common''s org.apache.wss4j.common.cache. So
this
>>>>> > handling needs to be done there. This component currently has the
>>>>> > same
>>>>> > setting like in cxf's 2.7.x (i.e, compiles with 2.5.1, uses create()
>>>>> > and
>>>>> > sets the range [2.5.0, 3.0.0).
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Maybe, there are other components that are also using 2.5.1 with
this
>>>>> > default 2.5 range and if these rely on the old behavior, they cannot
>>>>> > upgrade to ehcache to 2.5.2 or higher. So maybe it may not be a
good
>>>>> > idea
>>>>> > to change cxf 2.7.x's ehcache's lower range to 2.5.2.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > @Colm
>>>>> > are you reading this thread?
>>>>> >
>>>>> > thanks.
>>>>> > aki
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > 2013/7/4 Aki Yoshida <elakito@gmail.com>
>>>>> >
>>>>> > > maybe I should revert my opinion.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > if we can change the cxf 2.7.x et al branches to require ehcache
>>>>> > > 2.5.2,
>>>>> > > that will be probably better than putting more effort to support
>>>>> > > 2.5.1.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > 2013/7/4 Aki Yoshida <elakito@gmail.com>
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >> hi,
>>>>> > >> thanks all for the information.
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >> Is this issue about the manager instance that is created
using the
>>>>> > create
>>>>> > >> method in the newer version (eg., 2.5.2 and also 2.6.6,
etc) being
>>>>> > >> a
>>>>> > >> singleton? In other words, in the newer version to have
the same
>>>>> > behavior,
>>>>> > >> the newly introduced method newInstance needs to be instead
>>>>> > >> called?
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >> If that's the case, we should put the code to handle both
cases in
>>>>> > >> all
>>>>> > >> code lines.
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >> thanks.
>>>>> > >> aki
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >> 2013/7/4 Jason Pell <jason@pellcorp.com>
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >>> Sorry guys i never got back to this one. Would be easier
i should
>>>>> > >>> think
>>>>> > >>> to fix this for 3.0 and no longer support the old version
at all
>>>>> > >>> thus
>>>>> > no
>>>>> > >>> reflection magic.
>>>>> > >>> On Jul 4, 2013 7:04 AM, "Daniel Kulp" <dkulp@apache.org>
wrote:
>>>>> > >>>
>>>>> > >>>> Aki,
>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>> > >>>> This was on my todo list to look at, just never
have managed to
>>>>> > >>>> find
>>>>> > >>>> the time.   There is an issue logged about it:
>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>> > >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-4577
>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>> > >>>> If you have time, feel free to grab it and see
what you can find
>>>>> > >>>> out.
>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>> > >>>> Dan
>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>> > >>>> On Jul 3, 2013, at 4:58 PM, Aki Yoshida <elakito@gmail.com>
>>>>> > >>>> wrote:
>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>> > >>>> > cxf's trunk and branches (2.7.x, 2.6.x, etc)
all use ehcache
>>>>> > >>>> > 2.5.1
>>>>> > and
>>>>> > >>>> > create the karaf feature with the corresponding
smx's bundle
>>>>> > version.
>>>>> > >>>> But
>>>>> > >>>> > the version range specified in the package
imports is set as
>>>>> > >>>> [2.5.0,3.0.0),
>>>>> > >>>> > so we could use a newer version in runtime.
>>>>> > >>>> >
>>>>> > >>>> > As ehcache 2.5.1 is rather old (from 2012-01)
and there are
>>>>> > >>>> > newer
>>>>> > >>>> versions
>>>>> > >>>> > such as 2.6.6 (2013-05) and 2.7.2 (2013-07)
which is already
>>>>> > >>>> > an
>>>>> > >>>> > osgi-bundle,  I was wondering if we can use
a newer version
>>>>> > >>>> > for
>>>>> > >>>> trunk's
>>>>> > >>>> > build. There are some disappeared classes
and other changes,
>>>>> > >>>> > but the
>>>>> > >>>> usage
>>>>> > >>>> > in cxf seem to be compatible with these versions.
I tried both
>>>>> > >>>> > 2.6.6
>>>>> > >>>> and
>>>>> > >>>> > 2.7.2, and the build itself seems to run without
problems.
>>>>> > >>>> >
>>>>> > >>>> > How do you think about upgrading ehcache to
ehcache 2.7.2 for
>>>>> > >>>> > trunk
>>>>> > >>>> so that
>>>>> > >>>> > we can test cxf not just against old ehcache
2.5.1?
>>>>> > >>>> >
>>>>> > >>>> > As comparison, camel trunk uses ehcache 2.7.0,
while 2.11.x
>>>>> > >>>> > uses
>>>>> > >>>> 2.5.2.
>>>>> > >>>> >
>>>>> > >>>> > regards, aki
>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>> > >>>> --
>>>>> > >>>> 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
View raw message