Sounds like a good plan, especially asa few things have been fixed in the spec locator since the last release:
[SMX4-949] use Servicemix OSGi Locator for jaxws 2.2 api bundle [SMX4-921] Jaxb api throws jaxb exception when using the jre implementation [SMX4-860] Add a configurable timeout [SMX4-860] ServiceMix specs should wait for an implementation for a certain amount of time when in OSGi [SMX4-859] ServiceMix Specs should check class space consistency before using an implementation On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:45, Gert Vanthienen <[email protected]>wrote: > L.S., > > > Since Freeman already committed a fix this morning, how about adding a > specs > 1.9.0 release to the ServiceMix 4.4.0 release plan? There's hardly any > work > involved in doing the specs release so we might as well include this > improvement while we're at it... > > > Regards, > > Gert Vanthienen > ------------------------ > FuseSource > Web: http://fusesource.com > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/ > > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 5:26 AM, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Monday, October 24, 2011 4:24:36 PM Gert Vanthienen wrote: > > > L.S., > > > > > > > > > Personally, I don't think this was intentional - at least, I don't > recall > > > any discussion about switching back to the Geronimo implementation so > I'm > > > guessing we just picked the wrong implementation when we noticed the > two > > > OSGi activator implementations in the resulting JAR. Unless Freeman or > > > someone else knows about a good reason to stick with the Geronimo > > > implementation, it looks like it would be both more consistent and > easier > > > (i.e. not opt-in required) to switch to the ServiceMix implementation > for > > > everything. > > > > I certainly like the SMX locator more. However, now that I understand > what > > is > > going on with the Geronimo version, it's less of an issue to me. CXF > now > > has > > the "opt in" header and I've updated the features.xml to pull in the > > required > > Geronimo registry. Thus, I now have it working. So consider this a > "low > > priority, but certainly would be nice to have" kind of thing. > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Gert Vanthienen > > > ------------------------ > > > FuseSource > > > Web: http://fusesource.com > > > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/ > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > It seems the JAXWS-API 2.2 spec uses a quite different mechanism than > > > > all > > > > other specs. > > > > It embeds the Geronimo osgi bits for specs, while all other usually > use > > > > the ServiceMix one (the osgi locator). > > > > In addition to be incoherent, those specs also use a slightly > different > > > > mechanism, as providers have to opt-in by adding an osgi header. > > > > > > > > Is there any reason for not using the same mechanism as for other > specs > > > > ? > > > > > > > > -- > > > > ------------------------ > > > > Guillaume Nodet > > > > ------------------------ > > > > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ > > > > ------------------------ > > > > Open Source SOA > > > > http://fusesource.com > > -- > > Daniel Kulp > > [email protected] > > http://dankulp.com/blog > > Talend - http://www.talend.com > > > -- ------------------------ Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ ------------------------ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
