cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrey Redko <>
Subject Re: Couple more CXF 3.0 thoughts.....
Date Tue, 25 Mar 2014 15:14:20 GMT
Hi Dan,

I would agree with guys on GSoC (don't have enough details).
Definitely +1 to Java7 and +1 to stop with 2.6.x (unless some critical
fixes, maybe).

Best Regards,
      Andriy Redk

On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Daniel Kulp <> 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
> -
> Talend Community Coder -

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