You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net> on 2008/07/08 20:21:44 UTC
CXF 2.0.7 for G 2.1.2? - [Fwd: Re: Re: Re: Using WS-Security with
Geronimo 2.1.1]
Should we be considering CXF 2.0.7 for Geronimo 2.1.2? Does anybody know
of specific reasons to move to 2.0.7 or hold at 2.0.6?
Joe
Reference this portion of post by Dan Kulp on the user list:
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Using WS-Security with Geronimo 2.1.1
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 11:10:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
Reply-To: user@geronimo.apache.org
To: user@geronimo.apache.org
References:
<OF...@LocalDomain>
<ad...@mail.gmail.com>
<OF...@LocalDomain>
<ad...@mail.gmail.com>
<OF...@LocalDomain>
<e9...@mail.gmail.com>
<43...@mail.gmail.com>
<e9...@mail.gmail.com>
Geronimo pretty much includes just the parts of CXF that are needed to pass
the JAX-WS parts of the TCK. It doesn't include the "extra" things like
ws-addressing, ws-security, ws-rm, aegis databinding, etc.... Geronimo
didn't need them so they didn't pull them in.
When adding the jar like that, keep in mind that you may need other
dependencies like wss4j, xml-sec, etc.. that ws-security requires that might
not be shipped with Geronimo.
One thing to keep in mind is that the CXF ws-security implementation (and
the Axis2/Rampart implementation as well) is based on WSS4J which isn't up
to WS-Security 1.1 level yet. Some of the profiles it supports are "close"
to 1.1 levels, but for the most part, it's 1.0. A note to the wss4j dev
list (wss4j-dev@ws.apache.org) would probably a good start to figure out
what wss4j supports.
That said, it would be great if Geronimo could update to CXF 2.0.7
(non-incubator) for a 2.1.2 release.
<snip/>
Re: CXF 2.0.7 for G 2.1.2? - [Fwd: Re: Re: Re: Using WS-Security
with Geronimo 2.1.1]
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
2.0.6 is fine ... I only noticed the problems with 2.0.7. Something
must have changed that requires comparable Geronimo changes.
Joe
Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
> Was 2.0.6 OK or did it have the same TCK issues?
>
> Dan
>
>
> On Jul 14, 2008, at 4:21 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>
>> FWIW, I did a quick check with CXF 2.0.7 and hit some issues with the
>> TCK tests under Geronimo. There must be some Geronimo changes
>> necessary for this upgrade. We'll hold-off upgrading to 2.0.7 for
>> 2.1.2 unless someone has a chance to look into the tck issues before
>> out branch.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>> Joe Bohn wrote:
>>> Should we be considering CXF 2.0.7 for Geronimo 2.1.2? Does anybody
>>> know of specific reasons to move to 2.0.7 or hold at 2.0.6?
>>> Joe
>>> Reference this portion of post by Dan Kulp on the user list:
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: Re: Re: Re: Using WS-Security with Geronimo 2.1.1
>>> Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 11:10:07 -0700 (PDT)
>>> From: Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
>>> Reply-To: user@geronimo.apache.org
>>> To: user@geronimo.apache.org
>>> References:
>>> <OF...@LocalDomain>
>>> <ad...@mail.gmail.com>
>>> <OF...@LocalDomain>
>>> <ad...@mail.gmail.com>
>>> <OF...@LocalDomain>
>>> <e9...@mail.gmail.com>
>>> <43...@mail.gmail.com>
>>> <e9...@mail.gmail.com>
>>> Geronimo pretty much includes just the parts of CXF that are needed
>>> to pass
>>> the JAX-WS parts of the TCK. It doesn't include the "extra" things
>>> like
>>> ws-addressing, ws-security, ws-rm, aegis databinding, etc....
>>> Geronimo
>>> didn't need them so they didn't pull them in.
>>> When adding the jar like that, keep in mind that you may need other
>>> dependencies like wss4j, xml-sec, etc.. that ws-security requires
>>> that might
>>> not be shipped with Geronimo.
>>> One thing to keep in mind is that the CXF ws-security implementation
>>> (and
>>> the Axis2/Rampart implementation as well) is based on WSS4J which
>>> isn't up
>>> to WS-Security 1.1 level yet. Some of the profiles it supports are
>>> "close"
>>> to 1.1 levels, but for the most part, it's 1.0. A note to the wss4j
>>> dev
>>> list (wss4j-dev@ws.apache.org) would probably a good start to figure out
>>> what wss4j supports.
>>> That said, it would be great if Geronimo could update to CXF 2.0.7
>>> (non-incubator) for a 2.1.2 release.
>>> <snip/>
>>
>
> ---
> Daniel Kulp
> dkulp@apache.org
> http://www.dankulp.com/blog
>
>
>
>
>
Re: CXF 2.0.7 for G 2.1.2? - [Fwd: Re: Re: Re: Using WS-Security with Geronimo 2.1.1]
Posted by Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>.
Was 2.0.6 OK or did it have the same TCK issues?
Dan
On Jul 14, 2008, at 4:21 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
> FWIW, I did a quick check with CXF 2.0.7 and hit some issues with
> the TCK tests under Geronimo. There must be some Geronimo changes
> necessary for this upgrade. We'll hold-off upgrading to 2.0.7 for
> 2.1.2 unless someone has a chance to look into the tck issues before
> out branch.
>
> Joe
>
>
> Joe Bohn wrote:
>> Should we be considering CXF 2.0.7 for Geronimo 2.1.2? Does anybody
>> know of specific reasons to move to 2.0.7 or hold at 2.0.6?
>> Joe
>> Reference this portion of post by Dan Kulp on the user list:
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: Re: Re: Using WS-Security with Geronimo 2.1.1
>> Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 11:10:07 -0700 (PDT)
>> From: Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
>> Reply-To: user@geronimo.apache.org
>> To: user@geronimo.apache.org
>> References: <OFFAC5A3FD.692CBA0E-ONC1257474.003F56EE-
>> C1257474.0042914C@LocalDomain> <add18bc80806260712t4eccb9c9o7fbff28562162d13@mail.gmail.com
>> > <OF80AFEB70.45376D71-ONC1257475.002E6337-
>> C1257475.002F5E5C@LocalDomain> <add18bc80806270624h403fda54i6a107b4d3eb80012@mail.gmail.com
>> > <OF48817414.1A6C6BC0-ONC1257475.005266C9-
>> C1257475.00530092@LocalDomain> <e92248920806271230o74e5682du9900158114989c8f@mail.gmail.com
>> > <43...@mail.gmail.com> <e92248920807010231u4add2d83n5f93a9000a0eac6e@mail.gmail.com
>> >
>> Geronimo pretty much includes just the parts of CXF that are needed
>> to pass
>> the JAX-WS parts of the TCK. It doesn't include the "extra"
>> things like
>> ws-addressing, ws-security, ws-rm, aegis databinding, etc....
>> Geronimo
>> didn't need them so they didn't pull them in.
>> When adding the jar like that, keep in mind that you may need other
>> dependencies like wss4j, xml-sec, etc.. that ws-security requires
>> that might
>> not be shipped with Geronimo.
>> One thing to keep in mind is that the CXF ws-security
>> implementation (and
>> the Axis2/Rampart implementation as well) is based on WSS4J which
>> isn't up
>> to WS-Security 1.1 level yet. Some of the profiles it supports
>> are "close"
>> to 1.1 levels, but for the most part, it's 1.0. A note to the
>> wss4j dev
>> list (wss4j-dev@ws.apache.org) would probably a good start to
>> figure out
>> what wss4j supports.
>> That said, it would be great if Geronimo could update to CXF 2.0.7
>> (non-incubator) for a 2.1.2 release.
>> <snip/>
>
---
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://www.dankulp.com/blog
Re: CXF 2.0.7 for G 2.1.2? - [Fwd: Re: Re: Re: Using WS-Security
with Geronimo 2.1.1]
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
FWIW, I did a quick check with CXF 2.0.7 and hit some issues with the
TCK tests under Geronimo. There must be some Geronimo changes necessary
for this upgrade. We'll hold-off upgrading to 2.0.7 for 2.1.2 unless
someone has a chance to look into the tck issues before out branch.
Joe
Joe Bohn wrote:
> Should we be considering CXF 2.0.7 for Geronimo 2.1.2? Does anybody know
> of specific reasons to move to 2.0.7 or hold at 2.0.6?
>
> Joe
>
> Reference this portion of post by Dan Kulp on the user list:
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: Re: Re: Using WS-Security with Geronimo 2.1.1
> Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 11:10:07 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
> Reply-To: user@geronimo.apache.org
> To: user@geronimo.apache.org
> References:
> <OF...@LocalDomain>
> <ad...@mail.gmail.com>
> <OF...@LocalDomain>
> <ad...@mail.gmail.com>
> <OF...@LocalDomain>
> <e9...@mail.gmail.com>
> <43...@mail.gmail.com>
> <e9...@mail.gmail.com>
>
>
> Geronimo pretty much includes just the parts of CXF that are needed to pass
> the JAX-WS parts of the TCK. It doesn't include the "extra" things like
> ws-addressing, ws-security, ws-rm, aegis databinding, etc.... Geronimo
> didn't need them so they didn't pull them in.
>
> When adding the jar like that, keep in mind that you may need other
> dependencies like wss4j, xml-sec, etc.. that ws-security requires that
> might
> not be shipped with Geronimo.
>
> One thing to keep in mind is that the CXF ws-security implementation (and
> the Axis2/Rampart implementation as well) is based on WSS4J which isn't up
> to WS-Security 1.1 level yet. Some of the profiles it supports are
> "close"
> to 1.1 levels, but for the most part, it's 1.0. A note to the wss4j dev
> list (wss4j-dev@ws.apache.org) would probably a good start to figure out
> what wss4j supports.
>
> That said, it would be great if Geronimo could update to CXF 2.0.7
> (non-incubator) for a 2.1.2 release.
>
> <snip/>
>