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,
 users@cxf.apache.org
Subject: CXF, Java 6/Spring/etc... and deps.....
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 16:29:28 -0500
User-Agent: KMail/1.12.4 (Linux/2.6.32-gentoo; KDE/4.4.0; x86_64; ; )
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201002091629.29035.dkulp@apache.org>


As you may have noticed, last week (on trunk only) I moved all the 
dependencies that can be provided by Java 6 (except jaxb-impl/jaxb-xjc) into a 
special jdk15 profile that is auto activated on Java5.   Thus, trunk should 
now require less dependencies when running on Java 6.    

HOWEVER, I put Woodstox back in as a runtime dep this morning.   There are a 
couple reasons:
1) The parser in the JDK really sucks.   My benchmarking over the last couple 
days for a customer showed nearly 40% throughput reduction compared to 
woodstox.   IMO, the "out of the box" speed is important.

2) Related to (1), a full "mvn install -Pnochecks" was taking 6 minutes longer 
on Java 6 compared to last week.    Turns out, that's parser related.  :-)   I 
could have added woodstox as a test dep to all the modules, but again, I think 
it's important enough to make sure everyone uses it by default.   

The good news is that while the Sun parser was being used, I found a couple 
places where tests were failing with it.   I've updated the code so we now 
should work better with the Sun parser if someone really wants to use it.

I also started going through and marking the spring stuff as optional or 
provided (or test scope).    We don't really REQUIRE it in all cases, and this 
should allow the user to more easily use whatever version of Spring they want.

Anyway, I still have to update the distribution and bundle modules to now work 
correctly with java6.   If you build with java6, you get different results 
than with Java 5.   The lib dir has about 9 less jars, the manifest is missing 
entries, etc....    

For those of you using Maven and Java 6, I'd really appreciate it if you could 
try the 2.3.0-SNAPSHOT's to see if having all the extra deps removed will 
cause any major issues.   Likewise, on Java 5, I'd like to make sure all the 
required deps still come in.

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