reta commented on code in PR #1013:
URL: https://github.com/apache/cxf/pull/1013#discussion_r998123614
##
systests/wsdl_maven/codegen/src/it/cxf-4004/pom.xml:
##
@@ -37,12 +37,12 @@
cxf-xjc-ts
${cxf.xjc-utils.version}
reta commented on code in PR #1013:
URL: https://github.com/apache/cxf/pull/1013#discussion_r998138208
##
systests/wsdl_maven/codegen/src/it/cxf-4004/pom.xml:
##
@@ -37,12 +37,12 @@
cxf-xjc-ts
${cxf.xjc-utils.version}
jimma commented on code in PR #1013:
URL: https://github.com/apache/cxf/pull/1013#discussion_r998127232
##
systests/wsdl_maven/codegen/src/it/cxf-4004/pom.xml:
##
@@ -37,12 +37,12 @@
cxf-xjc-ts
${cxf.xjc-utils.version}
jimma commented on code in PR #1013:
URL: https://github.com/apache/cxf/pull/1013#discussion_r998142368
##
systests/wsdl_maven/codegen/src/it/cxf-4004/pom.xml:
##
@@ -37,12 +37,12 @@
cxf-xjc-ts
${cxf.xjc-utils.version}
Hi all,
What do you think about moving CXF DOSGI to the attic? There is very
little activity for many years now (last commit 2.5 years ago -
https://github.com/apache/cxf-dosgi/commits/main). It's just a
maintenance burden unless someone steps up to maintain it properly.
Colm.
dependabot[bot] opened a new pull request, #10:
URL: https://github.com/apache/cxf-dosgi/pull/10
Bumps [jackson-databind](https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson) from 2.10.1
to 2.13.4.1.
Commits
See full diff in https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson/commits;>compare view
dependabot[bot] commented on PR #8:
URL: https://github.com/apache/cxf-dosgi/pull/8#issuecomment-1282813249
Superseded by #10.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific
dependabot[bot] closed pull request #8: Bump jackson-databind from 2.10.1 to
2.12.6.1 in /distribution/multi-bundle
URL: https://github.com/apache/cxf-dosgi/pull/8
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL
Hi Colm,
I have never seen it used in the wild (at least, the projects I was/am
involved with), I think it would make sense to retire it, especially taking
into account the OSGi vague plans to support Jakarta. +1 from my side to
move it to the attic. Thank you.
Best Regards,
Andriy Redko
Hi Colm
Yes, I think it makes sense. I don't think CXF DOSGi is heavily used.
Regards
JB
On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 10:49 PM Colm O hEigeartaigh
wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> What do you think about moving CXF DOSGI to the attic? There is very
> little activity for many years now (last commit 2.5 years
10 matches
Mail list logo