I’m very strongly in favor of Option #1 at this point, with a “release note” mentioning that 3.5.x will be the last series to support Java8.
I know we have plenty of services running with Java8 and have several customers that are still targeting Java8. I really think we need to keep Java8 as an option at this point, but let folks know that it will be changing. Dan > On Aug 11, 2021, at 8:26 AM, Andriy Redko <drr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hey Jim, Romain, > > Thank you guys, I think Romain's suggestion to move 3.5.x to JDK-11 baseline > is good idea, we would > still be maintaining 3.4.x for a while, covering JDK-8 based deployments. > Regarding Jakarta, yes, I > certainly remember the discussion regarding the build time approach, > personally with time I came to the > conclusion that this is not the best option for at least 2 reasons: > - differences between source vs binary artifacts are very confusing (source > imports javax, > binary has jakarta, or vice versa), I think we all run into that from time > to time > - Jakarta is the way to go, the mainstream should have first class support > > Just my 5 cents, but we certainly should consider this approach as well, > there are good points to > follow it, summarizing what we have at the moment: > > Option #1: > - release 3.5.0 in preparation to JDK-17 LTS, keeping JDK-8 as baseline > - move master to 3.6.x (4.x?) with JDK-11 as the minimal required JDK version > (Jetty 10, ...) > - branch off 5.x (4.x?) to continue the work on supporting Jakarta 9.0+, with > JDK-11 as the minimal > required JDK version (Jetty 11, ...) > > Option #2: > - release 3.5.0 in preparation to JDK-17 LTS, use JDK-11 as baseline > - handle javax by a build setup (with api validation at build time to avoid > regressions) and use jakarta package as main api in the project (Romain), or > adding a new maven module to transform cxf artifacts with jakarta package > name (Jim) > > 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, ...) > > Thank you! > > Best Regards, > Andriy Redko > > > JM> On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 10:05 AM Andriy Redko <drr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Hey guys, > >>> I would like to initiate (or better to say, resume) the discussion >>> regarding CXF 3.5.x and beyond. >>> The 3.5.x has been in the making for quite a while but has not seen any >>> releases yet. As far as >>> I know, we have only pending upgrade to Apache Karaf 4.3.3 (on SNAPSHOT >>> now) so be ready to meet >>> JDK 17 LTS next month. I think this is a good opportunity to release 3.5.0 >>> but certainly looking >>> for ideas and opinions here. Importantly, I think for 3.5.x the JDK-8 >>> should be supported as the minimal >>> required JDK version (just an opinion since JDK-8 is still very widely >>> used). > >>> On the other side, many libraries (Jetty, wss4j, ...) are bumping the >>> baseline to JDK-11. The work >>> @Colm is doing to update to OpenSaml 4.x [1] is a good argument to have >>> the JDK-11+ release line. Should >>> we have a dedicated 3.6.x or 4.x.x branch(es) for that? > >>> Last but not least, Jakarta 9.0+ support. Last year we briefly talked >>> about it [2], at this moment it >>> looks like having dedicated release line (4.x/5.x) with Jakarta artifacts >>> is beneficial in long term. >>> Large chunk [3] of work has been already done in this direction. The >>> Spring 6 milestones with Jakarta >>> support are expected to land in Q4/2021 [4] but I am not sure what plans >>> Apache Karaf team has, @Freeman >>> do you have any insights? > > > JM> For Jakarta EE9 support , the another option could be adding a new maven > JM> module to transform cxf artifacts > JM> with jakarta package name. This transformed artifact can coexist with the > JM> javax namespace with "jakarta" classifier, > JM> and we don't have to maintain two branches until Jakarta EE10 and there > are > JM> new features added. > > JM> Other projects like hibernate and jackson use this shade plugin or Eclipse > JM> transformer to support jakarta ee9: > > JM> > https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-orm/blob/main/hibernate-core-jakarta/hibernate-core-jakarta.gradle#L100 > > JM> > https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-jaxrs-providers/blob/2.12/json/pom.xml#L115 > > > >>> To summarize briefly: >>> - release 3.5.0 in preparation to JDK-17 LTS, keeping JDK-8 as baseline >>> - move master to 3.6.x (4.x?) with JDK-11 as the minimal required JDK >>> version (Jetty 10, ...) >>> - branch off 5.x (4.x?) to continue the work on supporting Jakarta 9.0+, >>> with JDK-11 as the minimal >>> required JDK version (Jetty 11, ...) > >>> I think it is very clear that maintaining JavaEE + JDK8 / JavaEE + JDK11 / >>> Jakarta + JDK11 would consume >>> much more time from the team, but I am not sure we have other options if >>> we aim to evolve and keep CXF >>> up to date. Any thought, ideas, comments, suggestions guys? > >>> Thank you! > >>> [1] https://github.com/apache/cxf/tree/opensaml4 >>> [2] >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cxf-dev/202012.mbox/%3c1503263798.20201226124...@gmail.com%3E >>> [3] https://github.com/apache/cxf/pull/737 >>> [4] >>> https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-framework/issues/25354#issuecomment-875915960 > >>> Best Regards, >>> Andriy Redko > -- Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org <mailto:dk...@apache.org> - http://dankulp.com/blog <http://dankulp.com/blog> Talend - http://talend.com <http://coders.talend.com/>
