Fine with me

Thanks
Alessio

On 19/05/14 16:45, Daniel Kulp wrote:
Just wanted to throw out a quick discussion about how to manage the git repo 
for the short term.

With the last 2.6.x release, we announced there would be one more release of 
that branch.  Thus, we need to keep that branch around.   To avoid having to 
merge to 3 fixes branches, I’d like to keep master on 3.0.1 until 2.6.15 is 
released.   At that point, we can create the 3.0.x-fixes branch and set master 
for 3.1.    Is there any problems with that?  Anything needed for 3.1 that 
needs to be put on master immediately?

With 3.0.0 out, I expect a bit higher uptake of it and a possible influx of 
issues.   Thus, I’d like a relatively quick turnaround for 3.0.1.  Maybe 4-6 
weeks.   At that point, we could do 3.0.1/2.7.12/2.6.15 releases at once and be 
done with 2.6.x.      Would that work for everyone?


Once we start 3.1, I’d like to do a couple things:
1) Update to require Java7
2) Remove all the Jaxws 2.1 support stuff.   With being Java 7, we don’t need 
the various 2.2/2.1 profiles and differences and such.
3) *possibly* change the tooling to use the in-JDK JAXB XJC.   With recent 
versions of the JDK, the in-JDK versions are actually more up to date than the 
versions available in central.   Plus, this would fix some of the issues on 
Java8.   This MAY cause issue on IBM JDK’s.  Will need to investigate.  
Possible wrap the impl via reflect calls like we do in the runtime.  In any 
case, this would drop a few dependencies as well.
4) Start investigating Jetty9 support.   This may be hard without breaking 
Jetty8.
5) With Java7, start using some of the new interfaces, the AutoClosable one 
being the main “nice to have”.


Anyway, open for discussion.  :-)




--
Alessio Soldano
Web Service Lead, JBoss

Reply via email to