cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dennis Sosnoski <...@sosnoski.com>
Subject Re: Couple more CXF 3.0 thoughts.....
Date Mon, 24 Mar 2014 21:21:12 GMT
+1 removing SOAP TCP

+1 (to warning people for now, dropping Java 6 in an upcoming 3.x release)

+1 2.6 final

   - Dennis

On 03/25/2014 07:49 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:
> +1 to removing the unfinished GSOC… makes no sense to keep it.
>
> +1 to Java 6, but I would mark it as deprecated and be removed in a future release. 
Java 6 is EOL’d and I think we need to move with the times.
>
> +1 to a 2.6 final.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> On Mar 24, 2014, at 12:35 PM, Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> With 3.0 getting really close, I do realize this is kind of last minute, but wanted
to throw these out real quick.
>>
>> Would anyone object to removing all the SOAP over TCP stuff that is currently in
the SOAP binding?  It was a project started by a GSoC student several years ago.  However,
due to the complexity and poor documentation, it was not “finished” in time.   No one
has ever picked it up to finish it.  Thus, it’s incomplete, it doesn’t work correctly,
won’t actually interoperate with anything, etc…  It pretty much just results in a bunch
of extra classes in the soap binding, a few extra “provided” deps in pom, etc….    Plus,
it never caught on.    If someone DOES want to pick it up in the future, the code could be
resurrected from GIT.   I just don’t see that happening.  (in addition, there is the SOAP
over Websockets thing from Microsoft which encompasses  much of the same thing, but using
Websockets and would work with recent .NET things)
>>
>> Any thoughts about the Java6/Java7 support level?   This *IS* a “.0” release
which could be a good time to consider this.   I really don’t care either way at this point,
but I kind of expect that by 3.1 or 3.2, we’ll want to drop Java6 anyway due to dependencies
starting to require it.  (example: Jetty 9 requires Java7)    Anyway, something to think about.
   I’d be OK sticking with Java6 and saying we’ll go Java7 for one of the later releases.
     I suppose one thought is to keep Java6 for 3.0 so we have one version of CXF that support
JAX-RS 2.0 and runs on Java6.
>>
>> Related to that, what about CXF 2.6?   Once 3.0 is release, do we want to do a “final”
2.6.x and stop doing regular releases on that branch?   Doing so would allow removing all
the Java5 JDK’s which is certainly something I’m keen on.   Never got Java5 working on
my Mac.  :-)     That said, it’s also the only branch we currently have that support JAX-RS
1.1.
>>
>>
>> Thoughts on the above?
>>
>> -- 
>> Daniel Kulp
>> dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
>> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
>>
>


Mime
View raw message