> See my latest reply to Jan: in this context (i.e. provide a transitional > version > for projects upgrading from 1_0_X), (B) makes more sense.
Agree. A little bit dangerous is that CXF Rest impl in 1.1.0 can be broken by refactorings/bugs fixing and we do not see it immediately (integration tests are not activated). Perhaps it should be explicitly explained for the 1.1.0 users. Cheers, Andrei. > -----Original Message----- > From: Francesco Chicchiriccò [mailto:ilgro...@apache.org] > Sent: Montag, 21. Januar 2013 15:14 > To: dev@syncope.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving issues from one version to another > > On 21/01/2013 15:04, Andrei Shakirin wrote: > >> Hum, I actually thought you would have included the full CXF features > >> in > >> 1.1.0 alongside with still running but deprecated Spring MVC interfaces. > >> If I was wrong, could this be done? > > It will be optimal for us, as far as we resolver list setters issue for TOs > mentioned by Jan. > > > > What about integration tests? I see two options: > > A) activate both Spring MVC and CXF Rest tests already in 1.1.0 (will > > take a longer time) > > B) keep only Spring MVC tests running for 1.1.0 and activate CXF tests > > only in 1.2.0, when Spring MVC will be removed with in SYNCOPE-275 > > > > If users will start with CXF rest already in 1.1.0, option (A) makes more > sense. From other side than integration tests will take definitely more time. > > See my latest reply to Jan: in this context (i.e. provide a transitional > version > for projects upgrading from 1_0_X), (B) makes more sense. > > Regards. > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Francesco Chicchiriccò [mailto:ilgro...@apache.org] > >> Sent: Montag, 21. Januar 2013 14:02 > >> To: dev@syncope.apache.org > >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving issues from one version to another > >> > >> On 21/01/2013 13:51, Jan Bernhardt wrote: > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Francesco Chicchiriccò [mailto:ilgro...@apache.org] > >>>> Sent: Montag, 21. Januar 2013 13:18 > >>>> To: dev@syncope.apache.org > >>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving issues from one version to another > >>>> > >>>> On 21/01/2013 12:47, Fabio Martelli wrote: > >>>>> [...] > >>>>> I think that SYNCOPE-122 and SYNCOPE-135 will not make the > >>>>> difference > >> in reference to the load. > >>>> I disagree on this point: anyway, keeping SYNCOPE-122 in 1.1.0 > >>>> (point > >>>> 4 of my initial checklist) and moving SYNCOPE-135 and SYNCOPE-136 > >>>> from > >>>> 1.2.0 to 1.1.0 is really +-0 for me. > >>>> > >>>> Here is the new list, then, with changes required by Fabio and Marco: > >>>> > >>>> 1. move SYNCOPE-231 (e.g. CXF migration) and all subtasks to 1.1.0 2. > >>>> move > >>>> SYNCOPE-275 ("Upgrade Spring to 3.2") to 1.1.0 as it requires > >>>> SYNCOPE-231 > >>> Does this means that we will completely switch to CXF? I would be > >> completely happy about this! But until now I thought, that we would > >> not finish SYNCOPE-231 completely with 1.1.0 release, but only > >> prepare everything as close as possible and then do this final step for > >> next > release. > >> However I would not be concerned to completely switch within this > >> release, since most work will be done anyway. > >> > >> Hum, I actually thought you would have included the full CXF features > >> in > >> 1.1.0 alongside with still running but deprecated Spring MVC interfaces. > >> If I was wrong, could this be done? > >> > >>>> 3. move SYNCOPE-204 ("Add Karaf features") to 1.2.0 4. move > >>>> SYNCOPE-135 (" Password reset") to 1.1.0 5. move SYNCOPE-136 > >>>> ("Password required for resource subscription") to 1.1.0 > >>> +/-0 from me for these tasks. I don't feel a need to include them in > >>> +1.1.0 > >> release, but if someone if all excited about these features and has > >> time to get them done... Sure why not including them... > >> > >> Same here. > > -- > Francesco Chicchiriccò > > ASF Member, Apache Syncope PMC chair, Apache Cocoon PMC Member > http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
