On Friday 15 October 2010 10:53:38 am Ronald Müller wrote: > Hi, > > please keep in mind, that most people just want "use" it. Its desirable > that people utilise the latest version and the recommended versions > should stated somewhere on the web, but if there is no functional > dependency, than the dependency-level should be as low as possible. > > The JDK Stax-parser may by slow, but this should be no reason to reject > it - there is no API change. The same for JAXB.
Well, the JDK stax parser is not just slow, it's buggy. For example, it handles /r characters in text nodes completely wrong and causes signature problems with them. Thus, ws-security is not very reliable with it. JAXB in the JDK is also buggy. It holds onto things in thread locals using strong references. If your in a container that uses thread pools, those references could never be cleaned up. The result is that those classes and classloaders can never be removed, the jars remain locked, apps won't undeploy properly, memory leaks, etc.... By default, we wan the out-of-the box experience with CXF to work properly. If that requires shipping a newer version of something that's in the JDK, that what we need to do. Dan > Keep things simple! The real world is complicated enough. It took me > four days to bring my webservice up with DOSGi, not one line productive > code, only hunting exceptions and configuring framework - no fun. > Fortunately with happy end. > > In many projects this part is only a fraction of the whole. > > > my two cents. > > regards > > Ronald > > Am 15.10.2010 15:51, schrieb Daniel Kulp: > > jaxb-impl COULD, but not the servicemix version. The version in the > > modern JDK's is 2.1.10 which is newer than the smx version anyway. > > HOWEVER, there are some major bugs fixed in 2.1.13 which is why CXF > > 2.3.0 always depends on it. > > > > CXF 2.3.0, when using Java6 and Maven, won't bring in many of the things > > that are built into the JDK. Things like saaj, activation, etc... are > > not dependencies anymore as the JDK provides them. The two major > > execptions are: 1) jaxb-impl (see above) > > 2) woodstox - the Stax parser built into the JDK sucks. It's slow and > > buggy. Using woodstox is SOOOO much better. > > > > Due to zookeeper, DOSGi doesn't really support Java5 anyway. Thus, I'd > > say for DOSGi 1.3, we should just drop support for Java5 and remove the > > bundles that are no longer necessary. -- Daniel Kulp [email protected] http://dankulp.com/blog
