Hi Dennis,
In general, I think it would be great to accelerate the work in this direction
and having dedicated
release branch sounds like a good idea. Moreover, JDK 11 will bring even more
challenges for us
regarding the JAXB (and tons of related specs). I have been doing some work
related to that and from
dependencies perspective, it is large but envitable change (since JDK 11 cuts
more stuff). Same goes
for Spring Boot 2.0, the integration would need to be changed. The concern I
have though is that we
would have to support 3.1.x, 3.2.x and 3.3.x (if it is a go) for quite a while.
3.1.x is still being
used and we are getting requests from time to time to backport some changes
from 3.2.x. 3.2.x has to
stay for older Spring Boot integrations (1.5.x which is still majority) and
Java 8 (who knows for how
long). I would be curious to hear what Dan and other guys think, since they
have seen similar large
changes over the years. But I cerntainly agree we have to think about that,
dedicated branch gives
us more freedom to stabilize things and experiment while 3.2.x serves as a
stable backup.
Thanks for bringing this up!
Best Regards,
Andriy Redko
DK> Hi,
DK> i'd like to update CXF to Spring/ Spring Security 5 and Spring Boot 2.
There were also discussions about JAXB 2.3.0
DK> and we might have additional changes for Java 9/10. In my view that would
be a good start for CXF 3.3.x or what do you think?
DK> Cheers
DK> Dennis
