Re: Deprecate aegis databinding ?

Hi Jim, good call out. The first I can think of is aegis databinding. Is the aegis databinding still used by CXF users ? Is it a good time to deprecate and remove in the future release ? I liked the databinding in the past but nowadays JAXB is the standard. To get an indication who else

Re: [VOTE] - Move Apache CXF DOSGi to the attic

+1

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 3.4.9 and 3.5.4

+1 Greetings from ApacheCon New Orleans :-) Dennis

Re: Please update 4.0-SNAPSHOT

Hi Andriy, I think you are close, the errors are just Javadoc-related for Swagger and Jetty 9. Great work so far, really unfortunate that I didn't found the time to contribute... Best, Dennis

Re: Please update 4.0-SNAPSHOT

Hi Vladimir, the reason for that is that the build is failing since then: https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/CXF/job/CXF-JDK17-deploy/ Will take a look... Dennis

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 3.5.3 and 3.4.8

+1 Thanks!

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 3.5.2 and 3.4.7

+1 Thanks!

Re: [DISCUSS] CXF 3.5.x and beyond

Thanks for the summary Andriy, I like #3 Option #3: - release 3.5.0 in preparation to JDK-17 LTS, use JDK-11 as baseline - move master to 4.x to continue the work on supporting Jakarta 9.0+, with JDK-11 as the minimal required JDK version (Jetty 11, ...) + maintaining 3.4.x for JDK-8

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.4.2/3.3.9

+1 Thanks!

Re: Jakarta target

Hi folks, I hope you had a nice christmas. Looking at our (especially enterprise) users I agree that it will take another 3-5 years to adopt Jakarta EE (if they do it, unfortunately some are just frustrated and therefore re-architecting to use a different stack). Personally I think we should

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 3.4.1 and 3.3.8

+1 Thanks!

Re: CVE-2019-12419

Hi Colm, in my case the issue was different (incorrect version range). Therefore I have no example that excludes XJC. Best, Dennis

Re: CVE-2019-12419

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-12419 marks all the cxf artifacts (cpe:2.3:a:apache:cxf:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*) as vulnerable - hence: * cxf-xjc-runtime-3.3.1.jar * cxf-xjc-ts-3.1.0.jar gets marked as vulnerable - even though these are the latest version and unrelated to the issue - is there

Re: codegen failing on 3.4.0

Hi David, I'm unable to reproduce it. This interface is part of cxf-core which is listed in your output as well. Maybe a corrupted Maven download? Have you tried it with a clean repo? Best, Dennis Am 25.08.2020 um 09:55 schrieb David Karlsen: > I'm seeing: > > [INFO] Scanning for projects... >

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 3.4.0

+1 Thanks!

Re: Release CXF 3.4.0

Hi Dan, this compilation failure in samples seems to be related to your dependency update?! jax_rs_tracing_brave: Compilation failure [ERROR] cxf/distribution/src/main/release/samples/jax_rs/tracing_brave/src/main/java/demo/jaxrs/tracing/server/CatalogTracing.java:[77,39] cannot access

Re: Migration to new ci-builds.a.o

Hi Andriy! I've moved CXF-Master-Analysis job [1] to ci-builds but I don't have Sonar credentials, I am wondering if you know them or know where to get them? Thanks! [1] https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/CXF/job/CXF-Master-Analysis/ See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18847 only

Re: Release CXF 3.4.0

On 08.08.2020 15:11, Daniel Kulp wrote: I do think we are. I had one or two dependency updates I was attempting, but nothing that “needs” to be done. However, I’m on vacation until the 17th with limited bandwidth. If someone else wants to do the release, that’s fine. Otherwise I can

Re: Migration to new ci-builds.a.o

Hi, first successful build using matrix: https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/CXF/job/pipeline/job/master/65/ We can now start simplifying existing stages, adding additional stages for deploy and sonar and adding additional JDKs to the matrix. Best, Dennis

Re: Release CXF 3.4.0

Hi, we are ready for a release now, aren't we? Best, Dennis

Re: Migration to new ci-builds.a.o

Hi, short update: I managed to have a successful build with the combined pipeline for JDK 8 and 11 today https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/CXF/job/pipeline/job/master/18/ and now trying to simplify this using declarative matrix. Unfortunately there are still issues on the new Jenkins server

Re: Migration to new ci-builds.a.o

Hi Andriy, will do. Just started with the adapted pipeline from struts and wanted to simplify that using the declarative matrix feature. Unfortunately build queue length in Jenkins is >1000 at the moment which makes testing impossible. Will continue it later this weekend. Best, Dennis Am

Re: Migration to new ci-builds.a.o

In the meantime I had another thought, see here: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r0a86bc4ac23d3984701d75ddb75dda858cd08d2f7aa56c0e3ef86e75%40%3Cbuilds.apache.org%3E So in the end we would just having one job to cover the standard things. Best, Dennis Am 22.07.2020 um 14:26 schrieb Andrey

Re: [cxf] branch master updated: [CXF-8281]add a test for using Chinese as attachment file name

Hi Freeman, while the test is successful on my local machine, it is failing on Jenkins as the file isn't found:

Re: Release CXF 3.4.0

Hi, just tried Spring Boot 2.3.x locally, works well. Any reasons why I should not commit the change for 3.4.0? See also https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8301 Best, Dennis

Re: Migration to new ci-builds.a.o

Hi Andriy! > Thanks a lot, Dennis! The first job CXF-Trunk-JDK18 is migrated: > https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/CXF/job/CXF-Trunk-JDK18 > Could you please check if you have enough permissions to create new jobs, > change job configurations, etc. > Thanks! > Permissions seem to be ok. One

Re: Migration to new ci-builds.a.o

Happy to help, Andriy! Best, Dennis Am 21.07.2020 um 04:43 schrieb Andriy Redko: > Hey guys, > > The news stroke me by surprise but according to the mailing list thread [1], > we have > to migrate all our Jenkins jobs to the new ci-builds.a.o server(s). I have > created a > ticket for

Re: Release CXF 3.4.0

Hi, what about SAAJ 1.5? https://github.com/apache/cxf/pull/672 Best, Dennis On 14.07.2020 18:38, Andriy Redko wrote: Hi Colm, +1, with 3.4.x out we are going to stop supporting 3.2.x release, correct? Thanks! Best Regards, Andriy Redko COh> Hi all, COh> We currently have no open

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.3.7 and 3.2.14

+1 Thanks Dennis

Re: Releases soon?

+1 Thanks Dennis Am 12.06.2020 um 23:23 schrieb Andy McCright: > +1 from me. Thanks Colm! > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 11:36 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre > wrote: > >> It sounds good. >> >> Regards >> JB >> >>> Le 11 juin 2020 à 13:12, Colm O hEigeartaigh a >> écrit : >>> We should get 3.3.7 and

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.3.6 and 3.2.13

+1 Thanks!

Fwd: Build failed when maven-toolchains-plugin used

Hi, looks like someone tries to add JDK15. https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/CXF/job/CXF-Master-JDK11/ws/maven-plugins/codegen-plugin/target/it/jdk-cxf-with-toolchain/build.log mentions "Misconfigured toolchains. Non-existing JDK home configuration at /home/jenkins/tools/java/latest15"

Re: Jakarta EE TCKs and compatibility logo

Hi Andriy! > Done, https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CXF20DOC/JakartaEE+TCKs, > please feel > free to check/edit/comment! Thanks! Great work. I wonder if a Jenkins run with failed TCK tests can be marked as unstable (yellow) while a failed run (no test execution possible) is marked as

Re: [cxf-fediz] 01/02: Update Jetty

I think I found the reason and fixed the test failure with jetty 9.4.25. Please see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8193 Thanks Freeman, much appreciated. Btw. I wonder if we want to go for Jetty 10.0.x for CXF 3.4? Currently they have an alpha version released. We can discuss it

Re: [cxf-fediz] 01/02: Update Jetty

Hi! I think I'd prefer to keep the Jetty version in Fediz aligned with the version of Jetty in the CXF release. For CXF we need to debug JAXRSRequestDispatcherTest.testGetBookHTMLInclude (an update breaks it). Haven't found the time yet. Best, Dennis

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 3.3.5 and 3.2.12

+1 Thanks!

Re: New Maven coordinates for Jakarta EE specs

gt; > > Best Regards, > >Andriy Redko > > > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 10:51 AM Dennis Kieselhorst > > >> > >>> > >>>> Let's focus on JAX-WS and JAX-RS (along with JAXB) for 3.3.0 as those > >>>> are the main imple

Re: SonarCloud config

Hi Colm, thanks it works, results are now available here: https://sonarcloud.io/dashboard?id=cxf The rules probably need some adjustment We could also add it to the PR validation job (some other projects did this already https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/SonarQube+Analysis).

SonarCloud config

Hi, I adapted the analysis Jenkins job for SonarCloud. Unfortunately I have no permissions to provide a valid token. @Colm/ Daniel: Could you please generate a token on https://sonarcloud.io/dashboard?id=cxf and add it to the field in the config of

Re: WSDLManager.removeDefinition method is not always working

Hi Arkady! > I tested on version 3.3.3 and still has problems. > Can you provide us with a testcase that reproduces the issue? Cheers Dennis

Re: WSDLManager.removeDefinition method is not always working

Hi Arkady! > Can you please provide link to the bug ? > > I would like to know which jars/classes were fixed exactly. It started with this one https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-5407 but additional fixes have been made in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-7076 and

Re: WSDLManager.removeDefinition method is not always working

Hi! > I put attention the method "removeDefinition" of WSDLManager doesn't always > actually remove definition. > > Bus bus = BusFactory.getDefaultBus(); > WSDLManager wsdlManager = bus.getExtension(WSDLManager.class); > Definition def = wsdlManager.getDefinition(wsdlLocation); >

Re: Flip master to 3.4, create 3.3.x-fixes

Hi Andy! > The Jakarta EE 8 release (due in September) is supposed to be binary > compatible with Java EE 8 - i.e. the javax.* packages will still be javax.* > (not jakarta.*). Is the plan for 3.4.X to support Jakarta EE 8 (basically > just swapping the maven coordinates and optionally running

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.2.10, CXF 3.3.3, and buildutils 3.4.3

+1 Thanks!

Re: Releases

Hi Colm, please go ahead. Thanks Dennis Am 6. August 2019 16:03:29 MESZ schrieb Colm O hEigeartaigh : >Hi all, > >Are there any other issues that should be fixed for CXF 3.3.3 / 3.2.10, >or >are we good to go for the releases? > >Colm. > > >-- >Colm O hEigeartaigh > >Talend Community Coder

Re: Time to think about 3.4.0?

Hi Andriy, sure, please go ahead with the change. Unfortunately I don't have much time at the moment :-( Cheers Dennis Am 14. Juli 2019 20:19:00 MESZ schrieb Andriy Redko : >Hey Dennis, > >Sorry, I have never gotten the reply from you, not sure why :( Anyway, >do you mind >if I reconcile the

Re: Time to think about 3.4.0?

Hi Andriy, yeah, I remember it. I answered you at that time that the change is fine for me. I was also a bit undecided when initially creating the package name. Cheers Dennis Am 14.07.2019 um 19:52 schrieb Andriy Redko: > Hey Dennis, > > Sounds great, I have created a JIRA [1] to track this

Re: Time to think about 3.4.0?

Hi Andriy, thanks for bringing this up. I have it on my list for while now. We should agree on a timeframe, I would start switching master to 3.4.x soon. CXF-7601_microProfileOpenApi is also ready to merge, it doesn't hurt to have it in 3.3.x but it would be more semantic versioned to add new

Re: Bypass archiving on PR?

Hi Romain! > Is it intended that jenkins builds for pull-requests archive artifacts? It > takes quite some time so I wonder if it can be turned off for PR to save > some cycles - in particular when it fails ;). > > Corollar potentially being: why not just turning it on for master? Good proposal,

Re: Dropping JDK9 / JDK10 jobs from Jenkins

Hi Andriy! I think we could drop CXF's JDK9 [0] and JDK10 [1] jobs from Jenkins since these JDKs are officially dead. Any objections? No objections, I also thought about this to reduce the number of build jobs. Best, Dennis

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 3.2.9, CXF 3.3.2, and cxf-build-utils 3.4.2

+1 Thanks!

Re: Test failure

Hi Dan, >> I can do it on the weekend. We also have a disabled Jenkins job für Windows. >> Shall I enable it? > Only if we can also turn off all the “build failed” notices…. Until we know > it actually can build on Windows without a failure, I don’t really see the > point in sending out

Re: Test failure

The test is failing on Windows. I also had this when I once tried to build it there. It's not the only one so better use Ubuntu or Mac. Dennis Am 21. März 2019 17:48:07 MEZ schrieb Daniel Kulp : >I’m not seeing this on my machine.Right now I’m using >1.8.0_181-b13, but I’ll update to 202

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.3.1

+1 Thanks! Am 28. Februar 2019 19:56:36 MEZ schrieb Daniel Kulp : >This is vote to release 3.3.1. This doesn’t fix a ton of issues (only >12), but it does fix two relatively important regressions. > >Staging area: >https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecxf-1136/

Re: 3.3.1 tomorrow?

Definitely +1 Thanks! Am 27. Februar 2019 15:54:58 MEZ schrieb Daniel Kulp : > >I’d like to get 3.3.1 out real soon as it does fix a fairly severe >performance issue and I’d like to get a “.1” out to appease folks that >refuse to touch a .0. :) > >Anyone have any objections if I do the build

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.1.18

+1 I suggest to announce this as the last 3.1.x release (except for security fixes). Regards Dennis

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.3.0 and CXF XJC Utils 3.3.0

+1 although a fresh build is still not working on JDK9+ due to the Corba stuff. We should fix that for 3.3.1. Cheers Dennis

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.2.8

+1 Thanks!

Re: 3.3.0 soon?

> I was able to get the MP Rest Client 1.2 APIs and TCKs final release done > on time, so 3.3.0 will support the final release instead of a release > candidate! Great Andy, can we resolve https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-7926? Cheers Dennis

Re: microprofile openapi @asf?

Hi, as written in the JIRA comment https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-7601?focusedCommentId=1675=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-1675 there is now a branch for the implementation with a working draft. Cheers Dennis

Re: Jakarta EE TCKs and compatibility logo

Hi, I think we should definitely setup jobs to ensure the TCKs pass but do we really need the logo?! What do you think? Cheers Dennis On 2019/01/21 10:46:37, Mark Thomas wrote: > Apologies for the noise. > > The correct link for [3] is: > > https://jakarta.ee/legal/trademark_guidelines/ >

Re: 3.3.0 soon?

Hi, in my view everything we discussed is finished. So we can cut a release and start a vote, can't we? Cheers Dennis

Re: Fwd: Build failed in Jenkins: CXF-trunk-deploy » Apache CXF Manifest Jar #3341

Hi Colm, Freeman already updated cxf-xjc-utils. We can set the version to SNAPSHOT, that should fix it. Cheers Dennis Am 15.01.2019 um 20:18 schrieb Colm O hEigeartaigh: > > Hi Dennis, > > Could you look at this error if you get a chance? > > Colm. > > -- Forwarded message -

Re: New Maven coordinates for Jakarta EE specs

> >> Let's focus on JAX-WS and JAX-RS (along with JAXB) for 3.3.0 as those >> are the main implementations that we are offering. Everything else can >> be done for 3.4.0. >> > +1, assuming the JAX-WS upgrade is seamless. JAX-RS is already done right? > Then let's use a single version of JAXB for

Re: New Maven coordinates for Jakarta EE specs

> It would be great to get CXF out soon enough, since more and more projects > switch > to Java 11. From practical standpoint, releasing CXF 3.3.0 with JAXB deps > would > make a lot of sense (in my opinion), since every other project around did > exactly > that. However, we've already

Re: New Maven coordinates for Jakarta EE specs

> Can you update JAX-WS + SAAJ when the JAXB switch is done and working? Yes. The question is when do we update the other stuff (Activation, Annotation, CDI, EL, Mail, Validation, JSON, ...)? I'd like to have it clean for 3.3.0 but it's kind of transitive dependency hell. > Do > you know when

Re: 3.3.0 soon?

Hi Andriy! > I also noticed that some of our integrations, like fe Swagger / OpenApi do > explicitly depend on JAXB APIs artifacts. I think we should be careful here > and at least add exclusions, avoiding classpath collisions. There could be > more examples like that. Thanks. You are absolutely

Re: New Maven coordinates for Jakarta EE specs

Hi, the JAXB, JAX-WS, SAAJ and some more API dependencies are now available on central. Servlet-API is still missing, but I noticed that we are currently using 3.1.0 anyway. Do we plan to update to 4.0.2? Regards Dennis

Re: GraphQL Project?

> Side note o openapi: CXF works well with Geronimo impl [1], not sure > duplicating it would bring much, in particular since spec requires to be > cdi based and not deployment based as swagger integration is > (classes/resources cxf has in its factory are not enough) Hi Romain, my plan is to

Re: GraphQL Project?

Great idea. I think it would be great for CXF to have both OpenAPI and GraphQL support. Cheers Dennis

Re: cxf-services-ws-discovery-api

Hi Colm! > Is this test failing for anyone else? It's recently started failing for me > on Ubuntu. Perhaps we need to just disable it by default, as it already > doesn't run on RHEL. It's also failing when I'm running on Windows but passing on the Ubuntu machine during the Jenkins build:

Re: 3.3.0 soon?

> > think we should definitely integrate the JakartaEE dependencies (groupId/ > artifactId change as announced earlier). According to schedule they will be > release next Friday (14.12.2018). > > +1. Unfortunately the JAXB and JAX-WS releases are still not available on central. Haven't found an

Re: CxfTypeSafeClientBuilderTest failing on JDK9+

Thanks Andriy, looks good for 8-11 now, but 12 is now failing with: Caused by: java.lang.NoSuchFieldException: allowedModes at org.apache.cxf.microprofile.client.CxfTypeSafeClientBuilderTest.testCanInvokeDefaultInterfaceMethods(CxfTypeSafeClientBuilderTest.java:173)

CxfTypeSafeClientBuilderTest failing on JDK9+

Hi, only CxfTypeSafeClientBuilderTest is missing to have a stable build from JDK 9 - 11. java.lang.reflect.UndeclaredThrowableException at org.apache.cxf.microprofile.client.CxfTypeSafeClientBuilderTest.testCanInvokeDefaultInterfaceMethods(CxfTypeSafeClientBuilderTest.java:173) Caused

Re: 3.3.0 soon?

Hi, I think we should definitely integrate the JakartaEE dependencies (groupId/ artifactId change as announced earlier). According to schedule they will be release next Friday (14.12.2018). Regards Dennis

Re: CXF 3.1.18 release

> OK fair enough. I propose that this might be the last release of 3.1.x > though. +1

Re: New Maven coordinates for Jakarta EE specs

Hi, please note that not all dependencies are available on central yet but only in a staging repo. JAXB and JAX-WS dependencies are planned to be release in December. This page provides an overview: https://wiki.eclipse.org/Eclipse_GlassFish_5.1_Components_Release_Tracker Regards Dennis

Re: Remove HTrace tracing?

+1 We should only maintain active integrations. Cheers Dennis

New Maven coordinates for Jakarta EE specs

Hi, please note that there are new Maven coordinates for the Jakarta EE specs: https://wiki.eclipse.org/New_Maven_Coordinates In my view we should change the dependencies for our 3.3.0 release. I already did it for JAX-RS. Cheers Dennis

Re: microprofile openapi @asf?

Hi, I want to catch up with this topic and start to think about CXF-7601. My suggestion is to add a new module description-microprofile-openapi oder description-openapi-microprofile for it. > RMB> Just to update you: we just passed the TCK. Impl is likely not perfect > but I proposed @geronimo

Re: Looking for the 3.2.7 version of cxf-rt-rs-extension-reactivestreams and cxf-rt-rs-extension-rx2

> I have not been able to find the reactive extensions for 3.2.7 on Maven. > Can someone put cxf-rt-rs-extension-reactivestreams-3.2.7.jar and > cxf-rt-rs-extension-rx2-3.2.7.jar on Maven? It is available: http://central.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/cxf/cxf-rt-rs-extension-rx2/3.2.7/ and

Re: swagger-jaxrs2 2.0.1 / JAXB 2.3.0

> - @Freeman contributed the JAXB 2.3.0 specs to Apache ServiceMix > (https://github.com/apache/servicemix-specs/blob/master/jaxb-api-2.3) > - The cxf-specs (Karaf's feature.xml) should be using it (right now it uses > 2.2) > - But AFAIK the org.apache.servicemix.specs.jaxb-api-2.3 has not been

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.2.7 and xic-utils 3.2.3

+1 Thanks!

Re: Jenkins Builds

> Does anyone know what is causing this error? I've seen that too some days ago, but was too lazy to report it to INFRA. I just wiped the workspace, afterwards it was working. Cheers Dennis

Re: [VOTE] - Release Apache CXF 3.1.17

+1 (binding) Thanks!

Re: Adding resourcePackages in OpenAPICustomizer

Hi Irfan, just tried your usecase by adding resourcePackages to our sample https://github.com/apache/cxf/tree/master/distribution/src/main/release/samples/jax_rs/spring_boot and it worked. Maybe you can attach a project to reproduce it to the issue that you will create. Cheers Dennis

Re: [cxf] branch master updated: update some dependencies

I decided to revert ActiveMQ to the old version. >=5.15.0 causes the test failure. It also fails with Karaf 4.2.0. Everything looks correct so I don't know why. Maybe Christian can take a look... Regards Dennis

Re: [cxf] branch master updated: update some dependencies

g/repos/asf/cxf.git > > >>> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this >push: >>> new c9c209c update some dependencies >>> c9c209c is described below > >>> commit c9c209c4506c88c13af1f01861eb80c8e9fcb27e >>> Author: Denn

Re: swagger-jaxrs2 2.0.1 / JAXB 2.3.0

Hi Freeman! > FYI, I’ve already start doing it on Servicemix side, please see Great to hear that. Any planned release date? Cheers Dennis

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 3.2.6

+1 Thanks!

Re: swagger-jaxrs2 2.0.1 / JAXB 2.3.0

On 2018/07/27 11:28:33, Andriy Redko wrote: > 2.2.11 > > Let us try to upgrade to 2.3.0? :-) Looks like there is not yet an OSGi Servicemix Bundle for that version (this is referenced in cxf.jaxb.bundle.version). Regards Dennis

Re: swagger-jaxrs2 2.0.1 / JAXB 2.3.0

Now that we have 3.3.x in master we should be able to upgrade it. Has anyone already started with this? Cheers Dennis On 2018/04/19 09:28:29, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote: > Let's wait for Dan's opinion on this - maybe the upgrade is more suitable > for a new major release instead of 3.2.x? > >

Re: Change master to 3.3?

Definitely +1 > And how about for the master we also have spring 5 + spring boot 2, basically > merge the spring-5-boot-2 branch? Yes, I started the branch for testing and it looks good. Thank you for fixing some tests. Regards Dennis

Re: [VOTE] CXF 3.2.5/3.1.16

+1 Thanks!

Re: microprofile openapi @asf?

Hi Romain, currently we have an open issue for that https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-7601 but afaik nobody has started an implementation yet. In my view CXF should work with both Swagger Core annotations and Microprofile OpenAPI annotations in the end, I don't mind where it's hosted.

Re: Releases today?

> WSS4J 2.2.2 is released and we're free to call a vote on the CXF releases - > any objections to doing this later today? Or is there anything else anyone > wants to see in the releases? +1

Re: Swagger upgrade issues

Hi, we already noticed this in February: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e440d7e162f4462972a6116cc523c78b3f1b9128ca23a2fcf9d55167@ Failing tests are part of the discussion. I think we should postpone a breaking change until 3.3.x. Regards Dennis

Re: Release cxf-xjc-plugin so that it works with Java 10?

Hi Andriy! > Haven't started work on automatic module names yet, my bad. But we certainly > could do that for > the plugin, the only thing we need to do is to agree on naming convention to > follow. Like f.e., > just to throw some ideas: cxf.xjc, cxf.core, cxf.cdi, cxf.opentracing, >

Re: Start 3.3.x development

> Maybe a spring5/boot2.x compatible release could be done for 3.3, then a > 3.4 for java > 8? I've already changed things so that tatest 3.2.x work with both Spring 4/ 5 and Boot 1.5.x/ 2.x but at some point we should also deliver the latest versions as transitive dependencies, that's why I'm

Start 3.3.x development

Hi, i'd like to update CXF to Spring/ Spring Security 5 and Spring Boot 2. There were also discussions about JAXB 2.3.0 and we might have additional changes for Java 9/10. In my view that would be a good start for CXF 3.3.x or what do you think? Cheers Dennis

  1   2   >