On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Michael Glavassevich <[email protected]>
wrote:

> The division between the trunk and the XML Schema 1.1 branch never had
> anything to do with Java versions. The branch was a place for experimental
> development while the XML Schema 1.1 specification was still in flux. We
> made several "beta" releases for users with an understanding that the XML
> Schema 1.1 version of Xerces was a work in progress and along the way
> picked up a dependency (the XPath 2.0 library from Eclipse) that required
> Java 1.4+ to run. Now that the XML Schema 1.1 spec and development are
> complete we shouldn't need the split release anymore.
>
> What ends up actually happening depends on everyone's bandwidth. I hope
> it's not a secret to anyone that development activity (commits going into
> SVN) for Xerces-J has been quite low for several years. Folks aren't
> finding the time to do much coding. If uniting the branch with the trunk
> becomes another thing delaying Xerces-J 2.12 then perhaps it's better to
> continue releasing the two sets of packages than not having a release at
> all.


Personally, I'd rather see releases sooner than later. I would guess folks
(like me) would rather see RERO with bug fixes than a longer wait in order
to pick up the XML Schema 1.1 branch.

2c,
Gary



>
>
> Thanks.
>
> Michael Glavassevich
> XML Technologies and WAS Development
> IBM Toronto Lab
> E-mail: [email protected]
> E-mail: [email protected]
>
> "Jan Tosovsky" <[email protected]> wrote on 06/05/2017 06:23:30 PM:
>
> > From: "Jan Tosovsky" <[email protected]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Date: 06/05/2017 06:23 PM
> > Subject: Re: Xerces 2.12 release date
> >
> > On 2017-04-20 Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> > >
> > > Xerces-J 2.12.0 would comprise of two Xerces-J releases:
> > >
> > > One release will be from the trunk ... and its XML Schema component
> > > will be at 1.0 level. This release would run on JDK 1.3 min.
> > >
> > > Another release ... will provide support for XML Schema 1.1.
> > > This release would run on JDK 1.4 min.
> >
> > It sounds like artificial splitting just to keep support for Java 1.3...
> >
> > From end-user point of view I would be confused when browsing maven
> > repository. I would have to find some documentation and investigate the
> > purpose of each version...
> >
> > Java 1.3? In my POV the support for EOLed versions of (any) software is
> > beneficial only for attackers as they have easier way to compromise the
> > target system.
> >
> > Switching to more recent Java version could help in fixing issues like
> this:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1598
> >
> > Jan
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>

Reply via email to