I'm also +1 with this. I would like to merge the WSS4J 2.0 branch to trunk and switch trunk to be 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT.
Colm. On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 2:10 AM, Freeman Fang <[email protected]>wrote: > +1 for skipping 2.8 now and releasing 3.0 end of this year. > －－－－－－－－－－－－－ > Freeman(Yue) Fang > > Red Hat, Inc. > FuseSource is now part of Red Hat > Web: http://fusesource.com | http://www.redhat.com/ > Twitter: freemanfang > Blog: http://freemanfang.blogspot.com > http://blog.sina.com.cn/u/1473905042 > weibo: @Freeman小屋 > > On 2013-3-26, at 上午2:19, Daniel Kulp wrote: > > > > > We're getting close to April which normally would be the next release > (2.8). However, looking things over, I'm not sure it makes sense at this > time. Looking at trunk, the only major change (which is admittedly a big > one), is updating the JAX-RS 2.0 stuff from m10 to the RC level. > However, it's not complete yet. Almost everything else has been back > ported to 2.7.x. The other major chunk of work that is happening is on > the wss4j2 branch, but that isn't ready for for release yet either. (and > has some backwards compat issues to resolve if it would go on a 2.x line) > > > > According to the agreements Apache has with Oracle, we really cannot > "release" code that doesn't pass the TCK (which the 2.0 works would not). > Technically, we should not have released 2.7.0 as a release. We can > release things like "tech previews" or "beta" or similar, but not a full > release. Since we are working on trying to renew the agreements, Oracle > is paying attention to us pretty closely right now. > > > > So, what am I getting at? In order to release 2.8 in a few weeks, we'd > either need to back out all the JAX-RS 2.0 stuff to 1.1 level OR everyone > jump in full force and get it to pass the TCK. I really don't see either > happening. Backing out to 1.1 would be silly and the 2.0 TCK stuff is a > ton of work. Thus, my suggestion would be to skip a big release this > April and concentrate on bigger things for our Oct/Nov release. Possibly > make that a CXF 3.0 release instead of 2.8 where we can clean up some > stuff, break a few things (like change the couple API's that currently > force WSDL4J on JAX-RS users), etc… We can incorporate the WSS4J2 > changes as part of this as well. If we go this route, we could likely > start a series of "beta" releases or similar in June or so to get people > looking at it and testing with it. > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > -- > > Daniel Kulp > > [email protected] - http://dankulp.com/blog > > Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com > > > > -- Colm O hEigeartaigh Talend Community Coder http://coders.talend.com
