geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Only Support Java SE 6 with Geronimo 2.2
Date Mon, 17 Nov 2008 21:35:26 GMT
On Monday 17 November 2008 4:19:45 pm Donald Woods wrote:
> Sorry, I was away on vacation last week.
>
> Does anyone know of technical reason why we can't move to Java SE 6 and
> use the JAXB/JAX-WS implementation provided in the JDK?

Yes.   There are parts of CXF that won't work without the non-mungled versions 
JAXB.   (the versions in the JDK are package mungled.)   I've STARTED going 
down the route of using ASM and other trickery to get it working on cxf's 
trunk, but that's not on the 2.1.x branch.

Dan


>
>
> -Donald
>
> Jason Warner wrote:
> > Have we come to a consensus on this yet?  Perhaps we should put it to a
> > vote?  The discussion has died down, but there doesn't seem to be a
> > clear "winner."
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 7:53 AM, Donald Woods <dwoods@apache.org
> > <mailto:dwoods@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> >     I'm not proposing that we put any checks or hard stops in the server
> >     to prevent starting on Java SE 5, but I would like to remove
> >     JAXB/JAXWS 2.1 as it comes in Java SE 6 and use the wsgen in the
> >     JDKs instead of shipping some CXF code for Axis2 users.
> >
> >     Free Java SE 5 support/updates end next year, so I don't see why
> >     you'd want to continue supporting it in a 2.2 release that is
> >     targeted as a main release stream for 2009.
> >
> >
> >     -Donald
> >
> >
> >
> >     Kevan Miller wrote:
> >
> >
> >         On Nov 7, 2008, at 12:04 AM, Donald Woods wrote:
> >
> >             The time has come to make the hard decision -
> >
> >             Do we only build and certify Geronimo 2.2 on the Sun 1.6.0
> >             JDK and drop support for running on Java SE 5?
> >
> >
> >         Um. What do you mean "drop support"? We've only announced
> >         "certification" on a particular Java SE level, in the past.
> >         We've documented minimum SE platform (e.g. Java EE 5 is hard to
> >         do on 1.4).
> >
> >         I would be against some sort of explicit Java SE 5 runtime check
> >         that would fail server startup. If a user shows up with a Java
> >         SE 5 issue, I'd expect that we'd be trying to fix their problem,
> >         regardless of our "support statement"
> >
> >         I have no issue with performing certification testing, only, on
> >         Java Se 6 (but would also be happy to see some Java SE 5
> > runs...).
> >
> >         However, I don't see any reason to discourage users from using
> >         Java SE 5, if that's what they want...
> >
> >
> >
> >             Pros:
> >             - Reduce testing effort to one version of Java
> >
> >
> >         Fine, but w/ testing hardware, may not be a big issue to test on
> >         both...
> >
> >
> >             - Allows us to use the JAXB 2.1, JAX-WS 2.1 and wsgen tools
> >             in the JDK, instead of shipping those jars in our assemblies
> >             (and removes some more Sun RI from our assemblies)  :-)
> >
> >
> >         I thought we were going to be picking up tools from CXF --
> >         https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4351 Would that
> >         resolve your issues with Java SE 5?
> >
> >         --kevan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ~Jason Warner



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

Mime
View raw message