On 2010-07-17, at 11:00 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote: > On Saturday 17 July 2010 11:11:03 am Craig Tataryn wrote: >> I think +1 for Spring 3, if a company is going to make the leap to CXF 2.3, >> they are probably willing to make the jump to Spring 3.0. >> >> Would there actually be any @since 3.0 features you'd use from Spring? Or >> would it be possible they could still operate with 2.5.6 by doing maven >> excludes on the 3.0 transient deps? > > Right now, we default to Spring 2.5.6, but we have a profile for testing with > 3.0. We most likely would just reverse that. Thus, at THIS point, you > could easily exclude 3 and use 2.5.6. We could probably setup a build in > Hudson to use the spring 2 profile to make sure it would work. > >> No comment on Jetty, I only use Jett for testing purposes and not for >> actually deploying too so I think even if there was something with Jetty 7 >> which was screwing me up I could still continue BAU with say Tomcat. > > That would be the goal. The one "tricky" thing is that I might need to > update the servlet-api to 3.0 for Jetty, but I need to test to make sure that > won't break things when running in a 2.5 container. I'll comment more about > this in Benson's thread about jetty 7 in a bit. >
Now *that* I could see being a problem because of "legacy" containers which might be running CXF. *cough* WAS 6.1 *cough* Craig. > Dan > > > >> >> Craig. >> >> On 2010-07-17, at 6:23 AM, Cyrille Le Clerc wrote: >>> +1 for upgrading to Spring 3 and Jetty 7. >>> >>> Cyrille >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 11:14 PM, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Since we are getting close to having 2.3 ready to release, I'm kind of >>>> looking at the various deps to see if there are updates we should grab >>>> or not. Things like woodstox and abdera and such are pretty much >>>> no-brainers. >>>> >>>> The two main contention points are: >>>> 1) Jetty from 6 to 7- Benson has started investigating this. This >>>> DOES involve some code changes as the Jetty packages and stuff have >>>> changed. Thus, the http-jetty transport would be incompatible with >>>> Jetty 6. However, it would give us some potential new features such >>>> as support for continuations on HTTPs. (I think) >>>> >>>> 2) Spring - should we use 3.0.0 instead of 2.5.6? I think the answer >>>> for this is "go ahead". We've already have profiles to test this and >>>> the same code seems to work OK with 2.5.6 and 3.0.0. Just want to >>>> double check with folks though. >>>> >>>> I'd like to hear peoples thoughts on those. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Daniel Kulp >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://dankulp.com/blog > > -- > Daniel Kulp > [email protected] > http://dankulp.com/blog
