Mailing-List: contact users-help@cxf.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@cxf.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
From: Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org>
To: dev@cxf.apache.org
Subject: Re: JAX-RS : Merges to 2.1.x branch
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 10:37:38 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.11.4 (Linux/2.6.29-gentoo; KDE/4.2.4; x86_64; ; )
Cc: "Sergey Beryozkin" <sberyozk@progress.com>,
 users@cxf.apache.org
References: <008401c9e843$4b279d30$1202050a@emea.progress.com>
In-Reply-To: <008401c9e843$4b279d30$1202050a@emea.progress.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200906081037.39181.dkulp@apache.org>


This seems to make sense to me.   Since 2.1.x is based on 0.8 spec, it's not 
something that could even be "certified" and such.   Thus, JAX-RS users really 
should  be encouraged to try and migrate up to the 1.0 spec version.   

Dan


On Mon June 8 2009 10:13:26 am Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> CXF 2.1.x branch supports a 0.8 version of JAX-RS api.
>
> We put quite a lot of effort into ensuring 2.1.x users can write functional
> RESTful applications with the help of JAX-RS 0.8 api, by not only back
> merging all the fixes needed but also adapting some of the code from the
> CXF 2.2 lines (which uses jax-rs 1.0 api). For example, CXF REStful client
> api is fully supported in the 2.1.x line, even though the UriBuilder (which
> is used extensively in the client runtime) has different interfaces in 1.0
> and 0.8.
>
> During the last couple of months I didn't do any backmerges into 2.1.x as
> the bulk of changes which made it into 2.2 are either new enhancements or
> 1.0 api centric, as I found, especially in the latter case, the backmerges
> can be quite costly and time consuming. With the 2.2.x branch now being
> created I feel it makes sense to stop backmerging into 2.1.x unless :
>
> * bugs in 2.1.x have to be fixed
> * 2.1.x users ask for certain features which are available in 2.2/2.3 be
> copied to 2.1.x which is something I would be happy to do provided there're
> no 0.8 api restrictions.
>
> I hope it will make sense given that most users are l;ooking forward to
> migrating to JAX-RS 1.0 api.
>
> cheers, Sergey

-- 
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://www.dankulp.com/blog