Re: JAXB upgrade
Would it be possible for CXF folks to decide this issue soon? In Geronimo land we are kind of stuck right now (we have CXF disabled from the build because of the JAX-WS/JAXB issues) we are not making a lot of progress now in terms of intergration and testing. Thanks, Jarek On 3/2/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm OK with rolling back for now. However the spec itself is final and the RI impl is already out: https://jax-ws.dev.java.net/2.1/ Everyone else ok with it? Cheers, - Dan On 3/2/07, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At this time Geronimo can only certify with JAXB 2.0 and JAXWS 2.0. We're hoping that sun will update the tck to allow supporting the 2.1 specs, but as far as we can tell this has not yet happened. Getting information out of sun about this stuff can be difficult, but perhaps if we started now and now and are sufficiently persistent we will eventually find out something useful. Are the 2.1 spec versions officially released? Meanwhile we'd certainly appreciate it at Geronimo if you went back to the 2.0 spec versions for now. thanks david jencks On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:43 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote: Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1. For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
Re: JAXB upgrade
Yes, I will try to take care of this today (granted it might not get checked in until later today though). Cheers, - Dan On 3/5/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Would it be possible for CXF folks to decide this issue soon? In Geronimo land we are kind of stuck right now (we have CXF disabled from the build because of the JAX-WS/JAXB issues) we are not making a lot of progress now in terms of intergration and testing. Thanks, Jarek On 3/2/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm OK with rolling back for now. However the spec itself is final and the RI impl is already out: https://jax-ws.dev.java.net/2.1/ Everyone else ok with it? Cheers, - Dan On 3/2/07, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At this time Geronimo can only certify with JAXB 2.0 and JAXWS 2.0. We're hoping that sun will update the tck to allow supporting the 2.1 specs, but as far as we can tell this has not yet happened. Getting information out of sun about this stuff can be difficult, but perhaps if we started now and now and are sufficiently persistent we will eventually find out something useful. Are the 2.1 spec versions officially released? Meanwhile we'd certainly appreciate it at Geronimo if you went back to the 2.0 spec versions for now. thanks david jencks On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:43 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote: Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1. For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
Re: JAXB upgrade
Well that settles that! Do you know: are they changing the spec? Or are they just pulling their implementation? - Dan On 3/5/07, Daniel Kulp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'll pull the JAX-WS 2.1 stuff now. I just received word from Sun that they are pulling JAX-WS 2.1 anyway. (they are respinning it to address some issues with the WS-A stuff)Thus, it will be removed from the maven repository ASAP and our builds will fail. Give my 1/2 hour or so. Dan On Monday 05 March 2007 11:21, Jarek Gawor wrote: Would it be possible for CXF folks to decide this issue soon? In Geronimo land we are kind of stuck right now (we have CXF disabled from the build because of the JAX-WS/JAXB issues) we are not making a lot of progress now in terms of intergration and testing. Thanks, Jarek On 3/2/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm OK with rolling back for now. However the spec itself is final and the RI impl is already out: https://jax-ws.dev.java.net/2.1/ Everyone else ok with it? Cheers, - Dan On 3/2/07, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At this time Geronimo can only certify with JAXB 2.0 and JAXWS 2.0. We're hoping that sun will update the tck to allow supporting the 2.1 specs, but as far as we can tell this has not yet happened. Getting information out of sun about this stuff can be difficult, but perhaps if we started now and now and are sufficiently persistent we will eventually find out something useful. Are the 2.1 spec versions officially released? Meanwhile we'd certainly appreciate it at Geronimo if you went back to the 2.0 spec versions for now. thanks david jencks On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:43 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote: Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1. For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog -- J. Daniel Kulp Principal Engineer IONA P: 781-902-8727C: 508-380-7194 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dankulp.com/blog -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
Re: JAXB upgrade
I'll pull the JAX-WS 2.1 stuff now. I just received word from Sun that they are pulling JAX-WS 2.1 anyway. (they are respinning it to address some issues with the WS-A stuff)Thus, it will be removed from the maven repository ASAP and our builds will fail. Give my 1/2 hour or so. Dan On Monday 05 March 2007 11:21, Jarek Gawor wrote: Would it be possible for CXF folks to decide this issue soon? In Geronimo land we are kind of stuck right now (we have CXF disabled from the build because of the JAX-WS/JAXB issues) we are not making a lot of progress now in terms of intergration and testing. Thanks, Jarek On 3/2/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm OK with rolling back for now. However the spec itself is final and the RI impl is already out: https://jax-ws.dev.java.net/2.1/ Everyone else ok with it? Cheers, - Dan On 3/2/07, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At this time Geronimo can only certify with JAXB 2.0 and JAXWS 2.0. We're hoping that sun will update the tck to allow supporting the 2.1 specs, but as far as we can tell this has not yet happened. Getting information out of sun about this stuff can be difficult, but perhaps if we started now and now and are sufficiently persistent we will eventually find out something useful. Are the 2.1 spec versions officially released? Meanwhile we'd certainly appreciate it at Geronimo if you went back to the 2.0 spec versions for now. thanks david jencks On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:43 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote: Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1. For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog -- J. Daniel Kulp Principal Engineer IONA P: 781-902-8727C: 508-380-7194 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dankulp.com/blog
Re: JAXB upgrade
On Monday 05 March 2007 12:01, Dan Diephouse wrote: Well that settles that! Do you know: are they changing the spec? Or are they just pulling their implementation? They are changing it slightly. It has something to do with the Last Call Working Draft of the Web Services Addressing 1.0 - Metadata http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-ws-addr-metadata-20070202/ having some changes in it. They didn't want 2.1 out there that's incompatible with it, or something like that. I don't think it's API changes, but it may be. Just javadoc, docs, and possibly spec compliance (optional vs required type changes). Not really sure at this point. In anycase, I'm removing it from our builds. Tests are running now. Dan - Dan On 3/5/07, Daniel Kulp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'll pull the JAX-WS 2.1 stuff now. I just received word from Sun that they are pulling JAX-WS 2.1 anyway. (they are respinning it to address some issues with the WS-A stuff)Thus, it will be removed from the maven repository ASAP and our builds will fail. Give my 1/2 hour or so. Dan On Monday 05 March 2007 11:21, Jarek Gawor wrote: Would it be possible for CXF folks to decide this issue soon? In Geronimo land we are kind of stuck right now (we have CXF disabled from the build because of the JAX-WS/JAXB issues) we are not making a lot of progress now in terms of intergration and testing. Thanks, Jarek On 3/2/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm OK with rolling back for now. However the spec itself is final and the RI impl is already out: https://jax-ws.dev.java.net/2.1/ Everyone else ok with it? Cheers, - Dan On 3/2/07, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At this time Geronimo can only certify with JAXB 2.0 and JAXWS 2.0. We're hoping that sun will update the tck to allow supporting the 2.1 specs, but as far as we can tell this has not yet happened. Getting information out of sun about this stuff can be difficult, but perhaps if we started now and now and are sufficiently persistent we will eventually find out something useful. Are the 2.1 spec versions officially released? Meanwhile we'd certainly appreciate it at Geronimo if you went back to the 2.0 spec versions for now. thanks david jencks On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:43 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote: Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1. For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog -- J. Daniel Kulp Principal Engineer IONA P
Re: JAXB upgrade
This currently says... Sorry! Temporarily unavailable will be back soon... :-( --jason On Mar 2, 2007, at 4:31 PM, Dan Diephouse wrote: I'm OK with rolling back for now. However the spec itself is final and the RI impl is already out: https://jax-ws.dev.java.net/2.1/ Everyone else ok with it? Cheers, - Dan On 3/2/07, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At this time Geronimo can only certify with JAXB 2.0 and JAXWS 2.0. We're hoping that sun will update the tck to allow supporting the 2.1 specs, but as far as we can tell this has not yet happened. Getting information out of sun about this stuff can be difficult, but perhaps if we started now and now and are sufficiently persistent we will eventually find out something useful. Are the 2.1 spec versions officially released? Meanwhile we'd certainly appreciate it at Geronimo if you went back to the 2.0 spec versions for now. thanks david jencks On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:43 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote: Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1. For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
Re: JAXB upgrade
I'm OK with rolling back for now. However the spec itself is final and the RI impl is already out: https://jax-ws.dev.java.net/2.1/ Everyone else ok with it? In Eclipse-land we've got an IP clearance request in on 2.0, we'll add another one for 2.1, so we can have enabler plugins for current and future CXF. What's the Real Truth on JAX-WS . JAXB cross product? I'd like to be able to produce a rolled up integration plugin with both parts. regards --oh
Re: JAXB upgrade
At this time Geronimo can only certify with JAXB 2.0 and JAXWS 2.0. We're hoping that sun will update the tck to allow supporting the 2.1 specs, but as far as we can tell this has not yet happened. Getting information out of sun about this stuff can be difficult, but perhaps if we started now and now and are sufficiently persistent we will eventually find out something useful. Are the 2.1 spec versions officially released? Meanwhile we'd certainly appreciate it at Geronimo if you went back to the 2.0 spec versions for now. thanks david jencks On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:43 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote: Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1. For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
Re: JAXB upgrade
At this time Geronimo can only certify with JAXB 2.0 and JAXWS 2.0. We're hoping that sun will update the tck to allow supporting the 2.1 specs, but as far as we can tell this has not yet happened. Getting information out of sun about this stuff can be difficult, but perhaps if we started now and now and are sufficiently persistent we will eventually find out something useful. Are the 2.1 spec versions officially released? Meanwhile we'd certainly appreciate it at Geronimo if you went back to the 2.0 spec versions for now. thanks david jencks On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:43 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote: Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1. For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
Re: JAXB upgrade
I'm OK with rolling back for now. However the spec itself is final and the RI impl is already out: https://jax-ws.dev.java.net/2.1/ Everyone else ok with it? Cheers, - Dan On 3/2/07, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At this time Geronimo can only certify with JAXB 2.0 and JAXWS 2.0. We're hoping that sun will update the tck to allow supporting the 2.1 specs, but as far as we can tell this has not yet happened. Getting information out of sun about this stuff can be difficult, but perhaps if we started now and now and are sufficiently persistent we will eventually find out something useful. Are the 2.1 spec versions officially released? Meanwhile we'd certainly appreciate it at Geronimo if you went back to the 2.0 spec versions for now. thanks david jencks On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:43 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote: Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1. For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
Re: JAXB upgrade
I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1. For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
Re: JAXB upgrade
Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1. For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
Re: JAXB upgrade
Jarek Gawor wrote: Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. If the JavaEE5 TCK is only JAX-WS 2.0 compliant, this may be a problem. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1. For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
Re: JAXB upgrade
Sun sometimes allows implementations to certify using a newer api then was in required by the original JEE specification. My guess is that the next version of Glassfish uses these apis, so hopefully if we ask, they'll give us new signature files or a patched TCK. Anyway, to find out someone will have to ask on the Apache open-jcp list, and that person will have to commit to hounding that list until we get an up or down response. It is a lot of work and can take weeks/months to get a response, so I suggest you don't agree to take on this task unless you are going to have the time and commitment. -dain On Mar 1, 2007, at 10:24 AM, Jeff Genender wrote: AFAICT...the TCK for JAXB appears to be for 2.0.: https://jaxb.dev.java.net/tck.html and it appears that particular TCK is open to all ;-) On that web site it clearly states: ** Compatibility artifacts are available as follows: * The JAXB 2.0 PFD specification. ** We probably need to kick this up to Sun, but for safety, I would stick with 2.0 until we hear back from them. Thoughts? Jeff David Blevins wrote: On Mar 1, 2007, at 9:42 AM, Dan Diephouse wrote: I think we are all open to input on this particular point. Is there any way we can figure out what the JEE5 requirements are though? Assuming 2.1 is backward compatible to 2.0 the only real limitation can see is that often when testing the api libraries themselves (in this case the jaxb api), the requirements often follow a no more and no less policy. Which means that say we wanted to start implementing the new imaginary EJB 3.1 and it added two new methods on the InvocationContext interface, it would fail JEE5 certification. I don't know what the case is for apis associated with jaxb 2.1 vs jaxb 2.0 or jax-ws 2.1 vs jax-ws 2.0. Someone needs to look at the tck to know for sure. -David Thanks, - Dan On 3/1/07, Jeff Genender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jarek Gawor wrote: Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. If the JavaEE5 TCK is only JAX-WS 2.0 compliant, this may be a problem. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1 . For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog --Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
Re: JAXB upgrade
I think we are all open to input on this particular point. Is there any way we can figure out what the JEE5 requirements are though? Thanks, - Dan On 3/1/07, Jeff Genender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jarek Gawor wrote: Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. If the JavaEE5 TCK is only JAX-WS 2.0 compliant, this may be a problem. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1. For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
Re: JAXB upgrade
On Mar 1, 2007, at 9:42 AM, Dan Diephouse wrote: I think we are all open to input on this particular point. Is there any way we can figure out what the JEE5 requirements are though? Assuming 2.1 is backward compatible to 2.0 the only real limitation can see is that often when testing the api libraries themselves (in this case the jaxb api), the requirements often follow a no more and no less policy. Which means that say we wanted to start implementing the new imaginary EJB 3.1 and it added two new methods on the InvocationContext interface, it would fail JEE5 certification. I don't know what the case is for apis associated with jaxb 2.1 vs jaxb 2.0 or jax-ws 2.1 vs jax-ws 2.0. Someone needs to look at the tck to know for sure. -David Thanks, - Dan On 3/1/07, Jeff Genender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jarek Gawor wrote: Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. If the JavaEE5 TCK is only JAX-WS 2.0 compliant, this may be a problem. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1 . For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
Re: JAXB upgrade
AFAICT...the TCK for JAXB appears to be for 2.0.: https://jaxb.dev.java.net/tck.html and it appears that particular TCK is open to all ;-) On that web site it clearly states: ** Compatibility artifacts are available as follows: * The JAXB 2.0 PFD specification. ** We probably need to kick this up to Sun, but for safety, I would stick with 2.0 until we hear back from them. Thoughts? Jeff David Blevins wrote: On Mar 1, 2007, at 9:42 AM, Dan Diephouse wrote: I think we are all open to input on this particular point. Is there any way we can figure out what the JEE5 requirements are though? Assuming 2.1 is backward compatible to 2.0 the only real limitation can see is that often when testing the api libraries themselves (in this case the jaxb api), the requirements often follow a no more and no less policy. Which means that say we wanted to start implementing the new imaginary EJB 3.1 and it added two new methods on the InvocationContext interface, it would fail JEE5 certification. I don't know what the case is for apis associated with jaxb 2.1 vs jaxb 2.0 or jax-ws 2.1 vs jax-ws 2.0. Someone needs to look at the tck to know for sure. -David Thanks, - Dan On 3/1/07, Jeff Genender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jarek Gawor wrote: Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. If the JavaEE5 TCK is only JAX-WS 2.0 compliant, this may be a problem. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1 . For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog --Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
Re: JAXB upgrade
Yep...so for this reason I would probably ask that CXF hang on JAXB 2.0 for the time being. Jeff Dain Sundstrom wrote: Sun sometimes allows implementations to certify using a newer api then was in required by the original JEE specification. My guess is that the next version of Glassfish uses these apis, so hopefully if we ask, they'll give us new signature files or a patched TCK. Anyway, to find out someone will have to ask on the Apache open-jcp list, and that person will have to commit to hounding that list until we get an up or down response. It is a lot of work and can take weeks/months to get a response, so I suggest you don't agree to take on this task unless you are going to have the time and commitment. -dain On Mar 1, 2007, at 10:24 AM, Jeff Genender wrote: AFAICT...the TCK for JAXB appears to be for 2.0.: https://jaxb.dev.java.net/tck.html and it appears that particular TCK is open to all ;-) On that web site it clearly states: ** Compatibility artifacts are available as follows: * The JAXB 2.0 PFD specification. ** We probably need to kick this up to Sun, but for safety, I would stick with 2.0 until we hear back from them. Thoughts? Jeff David Blevins wrote: On Mar 1, 2007, at 9:42 AM, Dan Diephouse wrote: I think we are all open to input on this particular point. Is there any way we can figure out what the JEE5 requirements are though? Assuming 2.1 is backward compatible to 2.0 the only real limitation can see is that often when testing the api libraries themselves (in this case the jaxb api), the requirements often follow a no more and no less policy. Which means that say we wanted to start implementing the new imaginary EJB 3.1 and it added two new methods on the InvocationContext interface, it would fail JEE5 certification. I don't know what the case is for apis associated with jaxb 2.1 vs jaxb 2.0 or jax-ws 2.1 vs jax-ws 2.0. Someone needs to look at the tck to know for sure. -David Thanks, - Dan On 3/1/07, Jeff Genender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jarek Gawor wrote: Oh... I didn't even realize you guys are targeting JAX-WS 2.1. Now, I'm not sure how that affects things. If the JavaEE5 TCK is only JAX-WS 2.0 compliant, this may be a problem. Jarek On 3/1/07, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to revert the change, but I think that we ultimately need it. I believe we're targeting JAX-WS 2.1 (we switched the API jar the other day), and that requires JAXB 2.1. There are many benefits from a user perspective in 2.1 . For isntance it has a lot better functionality for things like WS-A and also makes it easier for people to use substitution types, which requires all sorts of hacks right now. Is Geronimo just looking to release JAX-WS 2.0 support or 2.1? Any idea if its possible to certify Geronimo with 2.1? Or does certification require 2.0? I'm not sure what the status is of the JAX-WS 2.1 TCK either. - Dan (I CC'd [EMAIL PROTECTED] in, hope thats ok) On 2/28/07, Jarek Gawor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi again, CXF code was recently upgraded to JAXB 2.1 and so I tired to figure out what sort of implications that might have on Geronimo. First of all, JAXB is one of those libraries that is shared by all applications in the Geronimo server. We also have a bunch of different components using JAXB to do deployment descriptor parsing, etc. So if we upgrade JAXB in G, we have to retest all these subcomponents to make sure they are ok. And I think in general that should be ok but potentially time consuming. Another potential issue that somebody raised was TCK testing. We don't know what happens if for example TCK expects JAXB 2.0 API but gets JAXB 2.1 API/implementation. Maybe nothing (as things supposed to be backwards compatible) but maybe it blows up. That's another thing for us to worry about. So, if this JAXB upgrade is not a critical issue for CXF would it be possible to switch back to JAXB 2.0? Thanks, Jarek -- Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog --Dan Diephouse Envoi Solutions http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
