On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Colm O hEigeartaigh <cohei...@apache.org>wrote:
> Thanks for all the responses. So to address the open questions: > > 1) Should streaming-xml-security go into Santuario or WSS4J? Should > all of WSS4J move to Santuario? > > The consensus seems to be that streaming-xml-security should go into > Santuario - and not as a sub-project, and that WSS4J 2.0 should stay > where it is. I will initiate a discussion with the Santuario project > to see what they think of the idea. > > 2) Do we require JDK 1.5 support? > > I propose to just leave this issue for now. Officially we will drop > 1.5 support in the development cycle, and possibly revisit nearer the > time of the 2.0 release if there are any major objections from > downstream projects. > > 3) Package names. > > Let's go with something like "org.apache.ws.security.stream". Should > we add a "2" in there somewhere to differentiate package names from > the 1.6.x releases? > FWIW, at Apache Commons, our guideline is to change package names when we break binary compatibility. Gary > > Colm. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ws.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ws.apache.org > > -- E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0 Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
