Thanks Dan,
Here is my update.
I have fixed:
ws_notification (jms broker issues)
ws_transaction (spring test runner doesn't actually run the test, not sure
why)
I will be working on:
jaxws_graalvm
jaxws_graalvm_dynamic
Not looked yet:
corba (weird ORB errors with java17, missing transaction classes with java11)
js_browser_client_java_first (ClassNotFoundException:
org.eclipse.jetty.util.resource.FileResource)
sts (some spring bean definition issues)
Thanks.
Best Regards,
Andriy Redko
>>
>> I passed through all samples to make sure they are compilable and buildable,
>> but I only
>> run a handful of them, it would be great to check that all samples do
>> actually work.
>> I can take *jms* and *jaxrs* ones, may take a few days though. Sounds like a
>> plan? If
>> yes, I will create an umbrella issue so we could track individual samples.
>> Thank you
>> for bringing this on up.
DK> I went through all the other samples (non JMS and non RS) and fixed up the
“easy” ones. What’s left:
DK> corba (weird ORB errors with java17, missing transaction classes with
java11)
DK> js_browser_client_java_first (ClassNotFoundException:
org.eclipse.jetty.util.resource.FileResource)
DK> sts (some spring bean definition issues)
DK> ws_notification (jms broker issues)
DK> ws_transaction (spring test runner doesn't actually run the test, not sure
why)
DK> Did not try: (M1 mac, no "native-image” available)
DK> jaxws_graalvm
DK> jaxws_graalvm_dynamic
DK> Not sure what to do with the CORBA things…. Likely could add the
javax.transaction things and get it to run with Java11. Might be a case where
the example works on 11 and not 17.
DK> Dan
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Andriy Redko
>>
>>
>>>> Yes, as Jim mentioned, most of our tests need JDK-17 to run (because of
>>>> Spring 6),
>>>> we also need JDK-17 to compile (same reason), but when Spring is not
>>>> involved (it is
>>>> optional by and large), JDK-11 is sufficient. We do have a number of
>>>> samples (bundled
>>>> with distribution) that run on JDK-11 with no issues. Please let me know
>>>> your conclusions
>>>> and if you need any help or pointers here. Thank you.
>>
>> DK> Found a minor class loader issue in cxf-core which fixed a couple of
>> things related to using spring5. (Non-servlet spring 5) I’ll get that
>> committed shortly once test run.
>>
>> DK> That said, has anyone actually gone through the samples and actually
>> made sure they work? They compile OK (with java17), but many don’t actually
>> work. None of the JMS samples seem to work at all. Some are still
>> setup to use activemq (might be OK, but the class path doesn’t have
>> activemq) and others that are setup for Artemis don’t have proper spring
>> bean configuration for it and the connection factories cannot be created.
>> I’ve only tested a few samples, but so far I’m seeing a bunch of issues.
>>
>>
>>
>> DK> Dan
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Andriy Redko
>>>>
>>>> DK> On Dec 11, 2022, at 9:36 PM, Jim Ma <mail2ji...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Andriy,
>>>>>> Thanks for the quick update. Good to see this is running with the jenkins
>>>>>> pipeline and all tests are green.
>>>>>> Did it include all things for the CXF 4.0.0 release ?
>>>>
>>>> DK> I didn’t do the 4.0.0 release as I kind of ran out of time. My basic
>>>> tests don’t work with java11, but I didn’t really get time to figure out
>>>> why yet. I’m trying to figure out if it’s still actually compatible with
>>>> java11 or not. If not, we should bump the jdk.version up.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> DK> Dan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 10:06 AM Andriy Redko <drr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I disabled this build (and
>>>>>>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/CXF/job/CXF-JDK19/ as well)
>>>>>>> because we run pipeline matrix [1] against both JDKs. These builds were
>>>>>>> quite useful when
>>>>>>> the main branch was unstable, but the pipeline should be sufficient
>>>>>>> now.
>>>>>>> Please let me
>>>>>>> know if you have any concerns, thank you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [1] https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/CXF/job/pipeline/job/main/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>> Andriy Redko
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> JM> Did we already start the 4.0 release work ?
>>>>>>> JM> I saw the CI build for CXF 4.0.0 is disabled now :
>>>>>>> JM> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/CXF/job/CXF-JDK17/ and last build
>>>>>>> result
>>>>>>> JM> was 7 days ago.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> JM> On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 8:46 PM Andriy Redko <drr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Colm,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I still wait for review on [1], if you or/and Dan could take a look,
>>>>>>>>> would be great. The [2] could go in today but no user response on [3],
>>>>>>>>> may need a bump to next version. Thank you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/cxf/pull/1033
>>>>>>>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8799
>>>>>>>>> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8798
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Andriy Redko
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> COh> Hi Andriy,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> COh> What's the status of these open issues? Can they be merged today
>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>> COh> else bumped to the next release?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> COh> Colm.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> COh> On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 6:17 PM Andriy Redko <drr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have only these 3 issues to wrap up [1], [2], [3], for all of them
>>>>>>>>>>> pull requests are opened, waiting for minor changes / confirmations
>>>>>>>>> fixes work.
>>>>>>>>>>> @Dan @Colm appreciate your input on [4] please, this is to eliminate
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> leak of the REMOVED_MARKER. Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8798
>>>>>>>>>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8799
>>>>>>>>>>> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8796
>>>>>>>>>>> [4] https://github.com/apache/cxf/pull/1033
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Andriy Redko
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm done now in terms of any remaining fixes for the next
>>>>>>>>>>>> releases...not sure if @Andriy Redko has anything else planned?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Colm.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 10:48 AM Colm O hEigeartaigh
>>>>>>>>>>>> <cohei...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It works for me as well. I'm coordinating with @Andriy Redko on
>>>>>>> two
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes that remain for 3.5.x/3.4.x and then we should be good to
>>>>>>> go.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Colm.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 10:10 AM Jim Ma <mail2ji...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Andriy and Dan !
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 10:28 PM Andrey Redko <drr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Works for me, thanks a lot Dan!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andriy Redko
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022, 8:45 AM Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think anything blocking is left, +1 to move forward!
>>>>>>>>> @Colm @Dan
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we want to drop 4.0.0 only or make 3.4.x / 3.5.x releases as
>>>>>>>>> well? With
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.0.0 out and 3.6.0 getting ready to be out soon (hopefully),
>>>>>>>>> the 3.4.x
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approaching EOL quickly, could be the last release.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was definitely planning on doing 3.4/3.5 releases sometime
>>>>>>>>> before the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end of the year. Thus, we could do a full set of releases. I
>>>>>>>>> have a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bunch of things happening this week, but would next Monday work
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everyone? That would give a week to get any final updates in.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you guys!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andriy Redko
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Nov 27, 2022, 10:27 PM Jim Ma <mail2ji...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Andriy,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can we start the release work if there isn't the major thing
>>>>>>>>> left we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to include in CXF 4.0.0 release ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> Can you please help do the
>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's convenient for you?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 1:18 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>>>>>>>>> j...@nanthrax.net
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 to release 4.0.0 even partial release.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JB
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 9:19 AM Jim Ma <mail2ji...@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After 9 months of work, we finally fixed/worked around all
>>>>>>>>> issues
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jakarta support. Now all the cxf tests are passed:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/CXF/job/CXF-JDK17/848/
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> we can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> say
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CXF successfully migrated to Jakarta namespace(and support
>>>>>>>>> Jakarta
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EE9.1).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To get cxf jakarta artifacts/binary available for the CXF
>>>>>>>>> community
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> especially the user who asked for this jakarta artifacts
>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more feedback from our community, do you think it's time to
>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CXF
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.0.0 and what else do you think we should have in this new
>>>>>>>>> jakarta
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/kwfg2s5gj72tkgn5c5vdcsvtgdkdm6dl
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Daniel Kulp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dk...@apache.org <mailto:dk...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Talend - https://talend.com <https://talend.com/>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
