RE: CXF REST migration plan

[Jan Bernhardt <jb...@talend.com>]

+1 from me. Glad to read that you are all already aligned with this migration plan.

I will also take care of testing and committing patches provided from Non-Committers (like Christian and Andrei) for this task.

Best regards
Jan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Francesco Chicchiriccò [mailto:ilgrosso@apache.org]
> Sent: Freitag, 21. Dezember 2012 10:10
> To: dev@syncope.apache.org
> Subject: Re: CXF REST migration plan
> 
> On 21/12/2012 09:59, Christian Schneider wrote:
> > Hi Francesco,
> >
> > it is a good idea to release a 1.1.0 version before we introduce the
> > cxf depdendencies.
> >
> > What parts of our plan do you think can go into trunk and what should
> > wait till after the 1.1.0 release?
> >
> > My proposal is this:
> >
> > On 20.12.2012 17:08, Francesco Chicchiriccò wrote:
> >> On 20/12/2012 16:44, Andrei Shakirin wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> We just finished CXF migration POC for users and roles: it is
> >>> successful and we approximately know how much efforts we need for
> >>> complete migration.
> >>> I would like to discuss the steps we are going to do for complete
> >>> migration in next year.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 1.       Prerequisites
> >>>
> >>> a)      Finishing persistence refactoring
> >>> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SYNCOPE-241,
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SYNCOPE-242 )
> > Before 1.1.0
> 
> Agreed, especially because SYNCOPE-242 is already fixed ;-)
> 
> >>> b)      Resolve ConnId CXF dependencies problem
> >>> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SYNCOPE-251 )
> > After 1.1.0
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> >>> 2.       Steps
> >>>
> >>> a)      Introduce interfaces for all controllers in
> >>> org.apache.syncope.core.rest.controller (the same way as for user
> >>> and role in cxf branch). Interfaces will contain JAX-RS annotations.
> >>> Commit interfaces to trunk
> >>>
> > Before 1.1.0 (if time permits)
> >>> b)      Provide temporary implementation of interfaces (step a) for
> >>> "old" spring based rest implementation (based on spring
> >>> restTemplate). Commit implementations to trunk
> >>>
> > Before 1.1.0 (if time permits)
> >>> c)       Refactor core rest integration tests to use controller
> >>> interfaces instead restTemplate. All rest tests must be successful.
> >>> Commit refactored tests to trunk. This step helps to prepare tests
> >>> to be used with CXF without breaking them
> >>>
> > Before 1.1.0 (if time permits)
> 
> Agreed only if the whole step 2 (a, b and c) is done at once and if additional
> dependencies are very limited (only for JAX-RS annotations).
> Otherwise, the whole step 2 should be moved after 1.1.0.
> 
> > All the rest should be delayed till after 1.1.0
> >>> d)      Add CXF dependencies, CXF Rest service configuration,
> >>> exception mappers and jaxb/json providers, but do not activate them.
> >>> Commit them to trunk
> >>>
> >>> e)      Update TO classes for JAXB marshalling (if necessary) and
> >>> keep spring marshalling working with the same TO classes. Commit it
> >>> to trunk. If keeping JAXB marshalling parallel to spring  is too
> >>> complicate, this step will be done in cxf-migration branch after
> >>> step
> >>> (f)
> >>>
> >>> f)       Create cxf-migration branch
> >>>
> >>> g)      Activate using CXF Rest for controller interfaces instead
> >>> temporary spring based implementation created on step (b). Fix
> >>> possible problems
> >>>
> >>> h)      Update console to use CXF Rest. Fix possible problems
> >>>
> >>> i)        Merge cxf-migration branch with trunk
> >>>
> >>> Our idea is to keep cxf-migration branch possibly short time, split
> >>> migration on some small steps and keep the tests and whole system
> >>> running in between.
> >>> Does this plan make sense? Any other suggestions / ideas?
> > Basically my proposal is to put into 1.1.0 all steps that have a low
> > risk and provide some benefits. I think it will be good to convert a
> > lot of the tests beforehand to the interfaces as this will make it
> > easier to backport changes to 1.1.x later.
> >
> > Apart from the above things what is the plan for 1.1.0? Is it feature
> > complete already or do you want to get some more features in?
> 
> As wrote yesterday, we should review all issues currently targeted to
> 1.1.0 and decide whether to keep or move to next releases.
> 
> Regards.
> 
> --
> Francesco Chicchiriccò
> 
> ASF Member, Apache Syncope PMC chair, Apache Cocoon PMC Member
> http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/