> > I passed through all samples to make sure they are compilable and buildable, > but I only > run a handful of them, it would be great to check that all samples do > actually work. > I can take *jms* and *jaxrs* ones, may take a few days though. Sounds like a > plan? If > yes, I will create an umbrella issue so we could track individual samples. > Thank you > for bringing this on up.
I went through all the other samples (non JMS and non RS) and fixed up the “easy” ones. What’s left: corba (weird ORB errors with java17, missing transaction classes with java11) js_browser_client_java_first (ClassNotFoundException: org.eclipse.jetty.util.resource.FileResource) sts (some spring bean definition issues) ws_notification (jms broker issues) ws_transaction (spring test runner doesn't actually run the test, not sure why) Did not try: (M1 mac, no "native-image” available) jaxws_graalvm jaxws_graalvm_dynamic Not sure what to do with the CORBA things…. Likely could add the javax.transaction things and get it to run with Java11. Might be a case where the example works on 11 and not 17. Dan > > Best Regards, > Andriy Redko > > >>> Yes, as Jim mentioned, most of our tests need JDK-17 to run (because of >>> Spring 6), >>> we also need JDK-17 to compile (same reason), but when Spring is not >>> involved (it is >>> optional by and large), JDK-11 is sufficient. We do have a number of >>> samples (bundled >>> with distribution) that run on JDK-11 with no issues. Please let me know >>> your conclusions >>> and if you need any help or pointers here. Thank you. > > DK> Found a minor class loader issue in cxf-core which fixed a couple of > things related to using spring5. (Non-servlet spring 5) I’ll get that > committed shortly once test run. > > DK> That said, has anyone actually gone through the samples and actually made > sure they work? They compile OK (with java17), but many don’t actually work. > None of the JMS samples seem to work at all. Some are still setup to > use activemq (might be OK, but the class path doesn’t have activemq) and > others that are setup for Artemis don’t have proper spring bean configuration > for it and the connection factories cannot be created. I’ve only tested a > few samples, but so far I’m seeing a bunch of issues. > > > > DK> Dan > > >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Andriy Redko >>> >>> DK> On Dec 11, 2022, at 9:36 PM, Jim Ma <mail2ji...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Andriy, >>>>> Thanks for the quick update. Good to see this is running with the jenkins >>>>> pipeline and all tests are green. >>>>> Did it include all things for the CXF 4.0.0 release ? >>> >>> DK> I didn’t do the 4.0.0 release as I kind of ran out of time. My basic >>> tests don’t work with java11, but I didn’t really get time to figure out >>> why yet. I’m trying to figure out if it’s still actually compatible with >>> java11 or not. If not, we should bump the jdk.version up. >>> >>> >>> DK> Dan >>> >>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Jim >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 10:06 AM Andriy Redko <drr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Jim, >>>>>> >>>>>> I disabled this build (and >>>>>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/CXF/job/CXF-JDK19/ as well) >>>>>> because we run pipeline matrix [1] against both JDKs. These builds were >>>>>> quite useful when >>>>>> the main branch was unstable, but the pipeline should be sufficient now. >>>>>> Please let me >>>>>> know if you have any concerns, thank you. >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/CXF/job/pipeline/job/main/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>> Andriy Redko >>>>>> >>>>>> JM> Did we already start the 4.0 release work ? >>>>>> JM> I saw the CI build for CXF 4.0.0 is disabled now : >>>>>> JM> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/CXF/job/CXF-JDK17/ and last build >>>>>> result >>>>>> JM> was 7 days ago. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> JM> On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 8:46 PM Andriy Redko <drr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Colm, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I still wait for review on [1], if you or/and Dan could take a look, >>>>>>>> would be great. The [2] could go in today but no user response on [3], >>>>>>>> may need a bump to next version. Thank you. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/cxf/pull/1033 >>>>>>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8799 >>>>>>>> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8798 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>>>> Andriy Redko >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> COh> Hi Andriy, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> COh> What's the status of these open issues? Can they be merged today >>>>>>>> or >>>>>>>> COh> else bumped to the next release? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> COh> Colm. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> COh> On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 6:17 PM Andriy Redko <drr...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hey guys, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I have only these 3 issues to wrap up [1], [2], [3], for all of them >>>>>>>>>> pull requests are opened, waiting for minor changes / confirmations >>>>>>>> fixes work. >>>>>>>>>> @Dan @Colm appreciate your input on [4] please, this is to eliminate >>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> leak of the REMOVED_MARKER. Thanks! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8798 >>>>>>>>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8799 >>>>>>>>>> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8796 >>>>>>>>>> [4] https://github.com/apache/cxf/pull/1033 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>>>>>> Andriy Redko >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm done now in terms of any remaining fixes for the next >>>>>>>>>>> releases...not sure if @Andriy Redko has anything else planned? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Colm. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 10:48 AM Colm O hEigeartaigh >>>>>>>>>>> <cohei...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> It works for me as well. I'm coordinating with @Andriy Redko on >>>>>> two >>>>>>>>>>>> fixes that remain for 3.5.x/3.4.x and then we should be good to >>>>>> go. >>>>>>>>>>>> Colm. >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 10:10 AM Jim Ma <mail2ji...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Andriy and Dan ! >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 10:28 PM Andrey Redko <drr...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Works for me, thanks a lot Dan! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andriy Redko >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022, 8:45 AM Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think anything blocking is left, +1 to move forward! >>>>>>>> @Colm @Dan >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we want to drop 4.0.0 only or make 3.4.x / 3.5.x releases as >>>>>>>> well? With >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.0.0 out and 3.6.0 getting ready to be out soon (hopefully), >>>>>>>> the 3.4.x >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approaching EOL quickly, could be the last release. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was definitely planning on doing 3.4/3.5 releases sometime >>>>>>>> before the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end of the year. Thus, we could do a full set of releases. I >>>>>>>> have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bunch of things happening this week, but would next Monday work >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everyone? That would give a week to get any final updates in. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you guys! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andriy Redko >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Nov 27, 2022, 10:27 PM Jim Ma <mail2ji...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Andriy, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can we start the release work if there isn't the major thing >>>>>>>> left we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to include in CXF 4.0.0 release ? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> Can you please help do the >>>>>>>> release >>>>>>>>>>>>>> when >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's convenient for you? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 1:18 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < >>>>>>>> j...@nanthrax.net >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 to release 4.0.0 even partial release. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 9:19 AM Jim Ma <mail2ji...@gmail.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After 9 months of work, we finally fixed/worked around all >>>>>>>> issues >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jakarta support. Now all the cxf tests are passed: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/CXF/job/CXF-JDK17/848/ >>>>>> and >>>>>>>> we can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CXF successfully migrated to Jakarta namespace(and support >>>>>>>> Jakarta >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EE9.1). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To get cxf jakarta artifacts/binary available for the CXF >>>>>>>> community >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> especially the user who asked for this jakarta artifacts >>>>>> like >>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more feedback from our community, do you think it's time to >>>>>>>> release >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CXF >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.0.0 and what else do you think we should have in this new >>>>>>>> jakarta >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/kwfg2s5gj72tkgn5c5vdcsvtgdkdm6dl >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Daniel Kulp >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dk...@apache.org <mailto:dk...@apache.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Talend - https://talend.com <https://talend.com/> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > -- Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org <mailto:dk...@apache.org> Talend - https://talend.com <https://talend.com/>
