Shiva Kumar H R wrote:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Tim McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
Hi, The JAXB refactoring of the GEP 2.1.x code is almost complete
for the 2.0.x
and 2.1.x versions of the Geronimo servers. Most major functions are
now working
and we are much better positioned to handle future schema changes in
a more
timely manner. Traditionally, the GEP has supported 3 to 4 versions
of the
Geronimo server (primarily to provide a migration/upgrade path), and
we had
originally planned on supporting v1.1, v2.0.x, v2.1.x. However,
since we are
almost 2 months behind the release of the v2.1 Geronimo server I
would like to
discuss some possible alternatives for supporting the v1.1 Geronimo
server in
this release of the GEP:
#1. Proceed with the JAXB refactoring work for the v1.1 code
(obviously the most
expensive in terms of time and testing required)
#2. Leave the v1.1 support in the current EMF implementation (i.e.,
the JAXB and
EMF implementations would co-exist)
#3. Remove support altogether for v1.1 in this release of the GEP --
support
only the v2.0 and v2.1 Geronimo servers (the least expensive in
terms of time
and testing required)
I'm now of the opinion that we should pursue alternative #3 and
remove v1.1
support entirely. My primary rationale is that the the old 2.0
release of the
GEP can still be used to provide v1.1 server support, and still
provides a
migration path from v1.1 to v2.0. It's true that we would lose the
v1.1 to v2.1
migration path, but this is mitigated somewhat since the support in
the GEP for
the v2.0 and v2.1 versions of the server is almost identical.
Equally important
is that we could then focus entirely on fixing the few remaining
JIRAs and
augmenting our JUnit testcases, and release the GEP 2.1 quicker
(i.e., in the
next week or 10 days). Thoughts ??
I too am +1 for #3 - would allow us to focus entirely on fixing critical
jiras & release GEP 2.1 quicker.
ditto
Cheers!
Hernan
--
Thanks,
Tim McConnell
--
Thanks,
Shiva
