On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 4:56 AM Andriy Redko <drr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Jim, > > No, we don't have a branch just yet, primarily because we depend on the > few > snapshots in 3.5.0/master. > > @Colm do you have an idea regarding xmlschema 2.3.0 release timelines? > @Dan do you have an idea regarding neethi 3.2.0 release timelines? > > At worst, you could create a new branch for this feature, or submit a > pull request against master which we should be able to re-target later > against the right branch (should be easy). What do you think? > This is a good idea. I'll send a PR against the master, and later we can decide the place to merge. Thanks, Andriy. > > Best Regards, > Andriy Redko > > JM> Thanks for more updates , Andriy. > JM> Is there a place/workspace branch, I can send a PR for this change? > > JM> On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 9:20 PM Andriy Redko <drr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Hey Jim, > > >> Thanks a lot for taking the lead on this one. Just want to chime in on a > >> few points. Indeed, as > >> per previous discussion in this thread, it seems like it make sense to > >> provide only the subset > >> of shaded modules with Jakarta namespace. Also, it was confirmed > yesterday > >> that Spring Framework > >> 6 milestones will be available in November this year but the first > >> snapshots will be out in late > >> September / early October, looks pretty promising. One **unexpected** > part > >> of the announcement > >> is JDK17 baseline for Spring Framework & Co, that could be a bummer but > I > >> have the feeling that > >> it will be lowered to JDK11. Thank you. > > >> Best Regards, > >> Andriy Redko > > > >> JM> Good point, Romain. We need to look at what to do to make sure all > >> JM> artifacts are included and transformed if this becomes a cxf module. > > >> JM> BTW, Spring 6 GA supports jakarta ee9 will come in Q4 2022 : > >> JM> > >> > https://spring.io/blog/2021/09/02/a-java-17-and-jakarta-ee-9-baseline-for-spring-framework-6 > > >> JM> On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 6:20 PM Romain Manni-Bucau < > >> rmannibu...@gmail.com> > >> JM> wrote: > > > > > >> >> Le ven. 3 sept. 2021 à 11:30, Jim Ma <mail2ji...@gmail.com> a écrit > : > > > > >> >>> On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 9:39 PM Romain Manni-Bucau < > >> rmannibu...@gmail.com> > >> >>> wrote: > > > > >> >>>> Le mer. 25 août 2021 à 13:39, Jim Ma <mail2ji...@gmail.com> a > écrit : > > > > >> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 2:10 PM Romain Manni-Bucau < > >> >>>>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> >>>>>> Le jeu. 19 août 2021 à 22:45, Andriy Redko <drr...@gmail.com> a > >> >>>>>> écrit : > > >> >>>>>>> Hi Romain, > > >> >>>>>>> Sorry for the delayed response. I have been thinking about your > >> (and > >> >>>>>>> Jim) suggestions > >> >>>>>>> and came to surprising conclusion: do we actually need to > >> officially > >> >>>>>>> release anything > >> >>>>>>> to shade/overwrite javax <-> jakarta? Generally, we could shade > >> >>>>>>> Spring or/and any other > >> >>>>>>> dependency but we would certainly not bundle it as part of CXF > >> >>>>>>> distribution (I hope you > >> >>>>>>> would agree), so not really useful unless we publish them. As > such, > >> >>>>>>> probably the best > >> >>>>>>> interim solution is to document what it takes to shade CXF > (javax > >> <-> > >> >>>>>>> jakarta) and let > >> >>>>>>> the end users (application/service developers) use that when > >> needed? > >> >>>>>>> In this case > >> >>>>>>> basically CXF, Spring, Geronimo, Swagger, ... would follow the > same > >> >>>>>>> shading rules. At > >> >>>>>>> least, we could start with that (documenting the shading > process) > >> and > >> >>>>>>> likely get some > >> >>>>>>> early feedback while working on full-fledged support? WDYT? > > > > >> >>>>>> This is what is done and makes it hard for nothing to > maintain/fix - > >> >>>>>> dont even look at tomee solution for shading please ;) - IMHO. > >> >>>>>> Being said it costs nothing to cxf to produce jakarta jars, that > it > >> >>>>>> makes it ee 9 compliant and more consistent for all but spring > >> usage (ee > >> >>>>>> integrators, plain tomcat 10 users etc...), I think it is worth > >> doing it, > >> >>>>>> at minimum. > >> >>>>>> At least a jakarta jaxrs (over jakarta servlet) bundle would be a > >> good > >> >>>>>> progress, not sure jaxws and other parts would be helpful since > >> they tend > >> >>>>>> to be in maintainance mode from what I saw. > >> >>>>>> So IMHO the best is a shade/relocation in the parent to deliver a > >> >>>>>> jakarta artifact for all module + a few jakarta bom. But if too > >> much - > >> >>>>>> which I can see/hear - a jakarta jaxrs bundle would work too > short > >> term. > > > >> >>>>> I agree to start with something to preview and collect more ideas > to > >> >>>>> support ee9. It's good to have a branch to really start something > >> for this > >> >>>>> topic. > >> >>>>> @Romain, do you have a prototype with shading or other tools for a > >> >>>>> jakarta jaxrs bundle or just some basic idea that we can have a > look > >> at ? > > > > >> >>>> Not ready for cxf but looking at meecrowave-core pom you would have > >> some > >> >>>> idea. > >> >>>> I just suspect pom deps need some refinement like with/without the > >> >>>> client (it is useless with java 11 now and less and less desired > >> AFAIK). > > > >> >>> @Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> Thanks for the > update. I > >> >>> looked at the meecrowave-core pom and understood how it transforms > >> package > >> >>> names with the shade plugin. Both shade plugin or eclipse > transformer > >> tool > >> >>> works for this purpose . > > >> >>> I created one prototype project which pulls in cxf dependencies, > >> >>> transforms to jakarta namespace and installs to local maven > >> repository : > >> >>> https://github.com/jimma/cxf-ee9-transformer > >> >>> This doesn't need more effort and no need the code/dependency change > >> >>> which breaks/mixes with javax support codebase. It can be simply > added > >> with > >> >>> another maven module in cxf repo to produce transformed jakata cxf > >> >>> artifacts or binary distribution. Your thoughts ? > > > >> >> If not all artifacts are proposed with jakarta support it is an > option > >> >> otherwise it would need a build module to synchronize this > submodule(s) > >> to > >> >> ensure none are forgotten - this is where I prefer the classifier > >> approach > >> >> even if it has this exclusion pitfalls - but cxf has it anyway due to > >> its > >> >> transitive dependencies so not worse IMHO ;). > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >>>>> Thanks, > >> >>>>> Jim > > > > > > > > > > > >> >>>>>>> Thank you. > > >> >>>>>>> Best Regards, > >> >>>>>>> Andriy Redko > > > >> >>>>>>> RMB> I'm not sure I see why you need spring to start this work. > The > >> >>>>>>> expected is > >> >>>>>>> RMB> there already so spring module can still rely on javax, be > >> made > >> >>>>>>> jakarta > >> >>>>>>> RMB> friendly using shade plugin or alike and that's it until a > >> >>>>>>> spring native > >> >>>>>>> RMB> integration is there. > >> >>>>>>> RMB> Worse case cxf-spring will not be usable with jakarta - > which > >> >>>>>>> still enabled > >> >>>>>>> RMB> all other usages, best case if spring makes the transition > >> >>>>>>> smooth is that > >> >>>>>>> RMB> it will work smoothly without more investment than for the > >> rest > >> >>>>>>> of the > >> >>>>>>> RMB> build. > >> >>>>>>> RMB> The pro of that options is that it will reduce the number > of > >> >>>>>>> unofficial cxf > >> >>>>>>> RMB> relocations sooner IMHO. > > >> >>>>>>> RMB> Romain Manni-Bucau > >> >>>>>>> RMB> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > >> >>>>>>> RMB> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog > >> >>>>>>> RMB> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < > >> >>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> | > >> >>>>>>> RMB> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > >> >>>>>>> RMB> < > >> >>>>>>> > >> > https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance > >> >>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>> RMB> Le lun. 16 août 2021 à 23:40, Andriy Redko < > drr...@gmail.com> > >> a > >> >>>>>>> écrit : > > >> >>>>>>> >> Hi Jim, > > >> >>>>>>> >> I will try to answer your questions, other guys will > definitely > >> >>>>>>> share more > >> >>>>>>> >> thoughts, please see mine inlined. > > >> >>>>>>> >> >> What's the task for JDK-17 LTS preparation ? Do we need > to > >> >>>>>>> support > >> >>>>>>> >> build 3.5.0 with JDK-17 ? > > >> >>>>>>> >> Build + All tests are green. > >> >>>>>>> >> Apache Karaf 4.3.3 will support JDK17 so our OSGi test suites > >> will > >> >>>>>>> pass. > >> >>>>>>> >> Besides that, there is still some work to do [1] but at > least we > >> >>>>>>> have > >> >>>>>>> >> workarounds. > > >> >>>>>>> >> >> For Jakarta ee9 support branch 4.x with source code > change to > >> >>>>>>> support > >> >>>>>>> >> jakarta namespace , we have to wait for spring and other > >> >>>>>>> >> >> third party dependencies jakarta ee9 ready. Now we don't > >> know > >> >>>>>>> when > >> >>>>>>> >> these dependencies are all ready and we can start this work. > > >> >>>>>>> >> This is correct, the earliest we could expect something is > >> Q4/2021 > >> >>>>>>> (fe > >> >>>>>>> >> Spring). > > >> >>>>>>> >> >> Given there is no features added in Jakarta ee 9.1 besides > >> the > >> >>>>>>> >> namespace change, we can provide the jakarta calssfier maven > >> >>>>>>> artifacts > >> >>>>>>> >> >> and binary release in 3.6.x or 4.x with transformation or > >> other > >> >>>>>>> better > >> >>>>>>> >> approach will be enough.We provide jakarta ee9 support early, > >> >>>>>>> >> >> then we can get more feedback on this topic. > > >> >>>>>>> >> It is definitely the option we have among others to discuss. > I > >> >>>>>>> have no > >> >>>>>>> >> doubts that everyone has rough idea of the pros and cons > >> >>>>>>> >> each option has, as the team we are trying to pick the best > path > >> >>>>>>> forward. > >> >>>>>>> >> Jakarta EE 10 is coming in Q1/2022 [2], we should keep it > >> >>>>>>> >> in mind as well. > > >> >>>>>>> >> Thank you! > > >> >>>>>>> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8407 > >> >>>>>>> >> [2] > >> >>>>>>> >> > >> >>>>>>> > >> > https://eclipse-ee4j.github.io/jakartaee-platform/jakartaee10/JakartaEE10#jakarta-ee-10-release-plan > > > >> >>>>>>> >> Best Regards, > >> >>>>>>> >> Andriy Redko > > >> >>>>>>> >> JM> On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 8:26 PM 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, ...) > > > >> >>>>>>> >> JM> What's the task for JDK-17 LTS preparation ? Do we need > to > >> >>>>>>> support > >> >>>>>>> >> build > >> >>>>>>> >> JM> 3.5.0 with JDK-17 ? > > >> >>>>>>> >> JM> For Jakarta ee9 support branch 4.x with source code > change > >> to > >> >>>>>>> support > >> >>>>>>> >> JM> jakarta namespace , we have to wait for spring and other > >> >>>>>>> >> JM> third party dependencies jakarta ee9 ready. Now we don't > >> know > >> >>>>>>> when > >> >>>>>>> >> these > >> >>>>>>> >> JM> dependencies are all ready and we can start this work. > > >> >>>>>>> >> JM> Given there is no features added in Jakarta ee 9.1 > besides > >> the > >> >>>>>>> >> namespace > >> >>>>>>> >> JM> change, we can provide the jakarta calssfier maven > artifacts > >> >>>>>>> and binary > >> >>>>>>> >> JM> release in 3.6.x or 4.x with transformation or other > better > >> >>>>>>> approach > >> >>>>>>> >> will > >> >>>>>>> >> JM> be enough.We provide jakarta ee9 support early, then we > can > >> >>>>>>> get more > >> >>>>>>> >> JM> feedback on this topic. > > > > > >> >>>>>>> >> >> 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 > >
