You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cxf.apache.org by CXF Explorer <ma...@coreobjects.com> on 2008/10/06 09:42:33 UTC
Potential impact of SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy on
CXF
Hi,
I am a newbie for CXF. I started exploring it as a potential framework for
implementing web service based application. I am ok with most of the stuff
with CSX but for its heavy dependency on Spring framework. I am aware about
the availability of bus and NonSpringServlet approach and would like to
explore it further. The forum says that most of the advanced cases will
require spring or doing a lot of low level API programming to get it
configured. That means I cannot keep away with Spring if I want to harness
the real potential of CXF framework :-(.
With the new
http://www.springsource.com/products/enterprise/maintenancepolicy
SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy , it looks like non subscribed
spring developers(I believe there are many of them) are going to have a hard
time identifying a stable spring release, as the spring source will issue
maintenance updates for three months period after a new major version of
Spring is released. My understanding of the policy may not be 100% correct,
but if it is correct, then how CXF is planning repository management for
Spring versions? The question is more serious for an Ant based project as
the dependencies have to be managed manually there.
Will CXF bundle a stable Spring release along with the jar distributions for
CXF framework in the future or will it rely on Maven to resolve the Spring
dependencies for a particular stable release?
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Potential-impact-of-SpringSource-Enterprise-Maintenance-Policy-on-CXF-tp19833297p19833297.html
Sent from the cxf-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Potential impact of SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy on CXF
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
It seems it's not needed anymore.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 8:13 AM, CXF Explorer
<ma...@coreobjects.com> wrote:
>
> With a strong reation from opensource community, SpringSource seems to have
> taken a major turnaround. Rod Johnson, in a recent post on SpringSource has
> announced modifications in the Spring enterprise maintenance policy. More on
> this link:
>
> http://blog.springsource.com/2008/10/07/a-question-of-balance-tuning-the-maintenance-policy/
> http://blog.springsource.com/2008/10/07/a-question-of-balance-tuning-the-maintenance-policy/
>
> I wonder why would one need a seprate project like 'freeSpring' now ???
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
> dkulp wrote:
>>
>>
>> Looks like a project has already popped up to support spring:
>> http://freespring.org/
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Potential-impact-of-SpringSource-Enterprise-Maintenance-Policy-on-CXF-tp19833297p19872906.html
> Sent from the cxf-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://open.iona.com
Re: Potential impact of SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy
on CXF
Posted by CXF Explorer <ma...@coreobjects.com>.
With a strong reation from opensource community, SpringSource seems to have
taken a major turnaround. Rod Johnson, in a recent post on SpringSource has
announced modifications in the Spring enterprise maintenance policy. More on
this link:
http://blog.springsource.com/2008/10/07/a-question-of-balance-tuning-the-maintenance-policy/
http://blog.springsource.com/2008/10/07/a-question-of-balance-tuning-the-maintenance-policy/
I wonder why would one need a seprate project like 'freeSpring' now ???
Cheers
dkulp wrote:
>
>
> Looks like a project has already popped up to support spring:
> http://freespring.org/
>
> Dan
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Potential-impact-of-SpringSource-Enterprise-Maintenance-Policy-on-CXF-tp19833297p19872906.html
Sent from the cxf-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Potential impact of SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy on CXF
Posted by Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>.
Looks like a project has already popped up to support spring:
http://freespring.org/
Dan
On Monday 06 October 2008, Christian Schneider wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> does anyone know if it is possible to put the spring jars into the
> central maven repository? If springsource does not do it. Will it be
> possible that someone from apache could build and upload the jars?
> Are there any legal issues with this? Would the policies in the maven
> repo allow this?
>
> I think if the releases would be provided by a open source project
> then there would be almost no technical issues.
> What we should avoid is that every project builds it´s own version
> eventually giving them different group names. This would wreck any
> dependency management.
>
> Greetings
>
> Christian
>
> Soltysik, Seumas schrieb:
> > So it sounds like for communities such as Fuse, after the 3 month
> > period during which fixes will be made available in compiled
> > releases, they will have to maintain their own copy of Spring and
> > fold in any changes that are made available to enterprise customers
> > and folded into the Spring trunk.
--
J. Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://www.dankulp.com/blog
Re: Potential impact of SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy
on CXF
Posted by Christian Schneider <ch...@die-schneider.net>.
Hi all,
does anyone know if it is possible to put the spring jars into the
central maven repository? If springsource does not do it. Will it be
possible that someone from apache could build and upload the jars?
Are there any legal issues with this? Would the policies in the maven
repo allow this?
I think if the releases would be provided by a open source project then
there would be almost no technical issues.
What we should avoid is that every project builds it´s own version
eventually giving them different group names. This would wreck any
dependency management.
Greetings
Christian
Soltysik, Seumas schrieb:
> So it sounds like for communities such as Fuse, after the 3 month period
> during which fixes will be made available in compiled releases, they
> will have to maintain their own copy of Spring and fold in any changes
> that are made available to enterprise customers and folded into the
> Spring trunk.
>
--
Christian Schneider
---
http://www.liquid-reality.de
RE: Potential impact of SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy on CXF
Posted by "Soltysik, Seumas" <Se...@iona.com>.
So it sounds like for communities such as Fuse, after the 3 month period
during which fixes will be made available in compiled releases, they
will have to maintain their own copy of Spring and fold in any changes
that are made available to enterprise customers and folded into the
Spring trunk.
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:dkulp@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 8:55 AM
To: dev@cxf.apache.org
Cc: CXF Explorer
Subject: Re: Potential impact of SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance
Policy on CXF
I'm not sure if there would be any major impact on CXF. We already
ship
a version of Spring with CXF that we've tested with and such. We try
to keep semi-up-to-date with what Spring releases so we have whatever
bug fixes they provide, just like we try to update as many of the other
dependencies as we can as well. Also, once the Spring releases are in
the maven repo, they are there. That includes the sources jars for that
release. Thus, once we find a version we like, it will be there.
Anyway, I'm not sure what impact it will have. My gut feeling says
"not
too much" for CXF here at Apache.
That said, for "Enterprise" users that use an enterprise version of CXF
as provided from a third party (like the FUSE branded stuff from
IONA/Progress), you would need to ask them. We don't have control over
that.
Dan
On Monday 06 October 2008, CXF Explorer wrote:
> Hi,
> I am a newbie for CXF. I started exploring it as a potential framework
> for implementing web service based application. I am ok with most of
> the stuff with CSX but for its heavy dependency on Spring framework. I
> am aware about the availability of bus and NonSpringServlet approach
> and would like to explore it further. The forum says that most of the
> advanced cases will require spring or doing a lot of low level API
> programming to get it configured. That means I cannot keep away with
> Spring if I want to harness the real potential of CXF framework :-(.
>
> With the new
> http://www.springsource.com/products/enterprise/maintenancepolicy
> SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy , it looks like non
> subscribed spring developers(I believe there are many of them) are
> going to have a hard time identifying a stable spring release, as the
> spring source will issue maintenance updates for three months period
> after a new major version of Spring is released. My understanding of
> the policy may not be 100% correct, but if it is correct, then how CXF
> is planning repository management for Spring versions? The question is
> more serious for an Ant based project as the dependencies have to be
> managed manually there.
>
> Will CXF bundle a stable Spring release along with the jar
> distributions for CXF framework in the future or will it rely on Maven
> to resolve the Spring dependencies for a particular stable release?
--
J. Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://www.dankulp.com/blog
Re: Potential impact of SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy on CXF
Posted by Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>.
I'm not sure if there would be any major impact on CXF. We already ship
a version of Spring with CXF that we've tested with and such. We try
to keep semi-up-to-date with what Spring releases so we have whatever
bug fixes they provide, just like we try to update as many of the other
dependencies as we can as well. Also, once the Spring releases are in
the maven repo, they are there. That includes the sources jars for that
release. Thus, once we find a version we like, it will be there.
Anyway, I'm not sure what impact it will have. My gut feeling says "not
too much" for CXF here at Apache.
That said, for "Enterprise" users that use an enterprise version of CXF
as provided from a third party (like the FUSE branded stuff from
IONA/Progress), you would need to ask them. We don't have control over
that.
Dan
On Monday 06 October 2008, CXF Explorer wrote:
> Hi,
> I am a newbie for CXF. I started exploring it as a potential framework
> for implementing web service based application. I am ok with most of
> the stuff with CSX but for its heavy dependency on Spring framework. I
> am aware about the availability of bus and NonSpringServlet approach
> and would like to explore it further. The forum says that most of the
> advanced cases will require spring or doing a lot of low level API
> programming to get it configured. That means I cannot keep away with
> Spring if I want to harness the real potential of CXF framework :-(.
>
> With the new
> http://www.springsource.com/products/enterprise/maintenancepolicy
> SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy , it looks like non
> subscribed spring developers(I believe there are many of them) are
> going to have a hard time identifying a stable spring release, as the
> spring source will issue maintenance updates for three months period
> after a new major version of Spring is released. My understanding of
> the policy may not be 100% correct, but if it is correct, then how CXF
> is planning repository management for Spring versions? The question is
> more serious for an Ant based project as the dependencies have to be
> managed manually there.
>
> Will CXF bundle a stable Spring release along with the jar
> distributions for CXF framework in the future or will it rely on Maven
> to resolve the Spring dependencies for a particular stable release?
--
J. Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://www.dankulp.com/blog
Re: Potential impact of SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy on CXF
Posted by Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>.
On Monday 06 October 2008, Richard Opalka wrote:
> The license is LGPL
Which isn't useful for us. We cannot ship LGPL jars.
If we HAD to change, we'd probably have to pull all the container stuff
out into some sort of Abstract notion and then allow Spring/Plexus/Etc..
to be plugged in. Either that or enhance the non-spring stuff to make
it completely usable without spring.
Dan
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
> >> It's open well tested MC implementation that is loosely coupled
> >> with JBoss AS.
> >
> > ...and is LGPL-licensed, perhaps? It's not clear from the project
> > page, and the Legal Notice in the User Guide merely contains a
> > human-readable address.
> >
> > --oh
--
J. Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://www.dankulp.com/blog
Re: Potential impact of SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy
on CXF
Posted by Glen Mazza <gl...@gmail.com>.
Which makes it unfortunately most useless for Apache--but still, although I'm
sure it's a fine product, we would have the same headaches, with users next
complaining about the dependency on *your* project. Can't please everyone I
guess...
Glen
Richard Opalka wrote:
>
> The license is LGPL
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>>> It's open well tested MC implementation that is loosely coupled with
>>> JBoss
>>> AS.
>>>
>>
>> ...and is LGPL-licensed, perhaps? It's not clear from the project page,
>> and
>> the Legal Notice in the User Guide merely contains a human-readable
>> address.
>>
>> --oh
>>
>
>
> --
> B.Sc. Richard Opalka
> Senior Software Engineer
> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
>
> Mobile: +420 731 186 942
> Mail: ropalka@redhat.com
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Potential-impact-of-SpringSource-Enterprise-Maintenance-Policy-on-CXF-tp19833297p19837249.html
Sent from the cxf-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Potential impact of SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy
on CXF
Posted by Richard Opalka <ro...@redhat.com>.
The license is LGPL
Cheers,
Richard
>> It's open well tested MC implementation that is loosely coupled with JBoss
>> AS.
>>
>
> ...and is LGPL-licensed, perhaps? It's not clear from the project page, and
> the Legal Notice in the User Guide merely contains a human-readable address.
>
> --oh
>
--
B.Sc. Richard Opalka
Senior Software Engineer
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
Mobile: +420 731 186 942
Mail: ropalka@redhat.com
Re: Potential impact of SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy on CXF
Posted by Oisin Hurley <oi...@gmail.com>.
> It's open well tested MC implementation that is loosely coupled with JBoss
> AS.
...and is LGPL-licensed, perhaps? It's not clear from the project page, and
the Legal Notice in the User Guide merely contains a human-readable address.
--oh
Re: Potential impact of SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy
on CXF
Posted by Richard Opalka <ro...@redhat.com>.
Hi Glen and CXF Community,
there's no need to reinvent the wheel. Did you hear about JBoss
Microcontainer?
It's open well tested MC implementation that is loosely coupled with
JBoss AS.
Just for your information JBoss MC 2.0 is going to GA state soon.
See http://www.jboss.org/jbossmc/ for more information.
Richard
Glen Mazza wrote:
> By reading the FAQ, it shows that we will always have access to the source
> code for a particular build, but not just the compiled version after three
> months. Presumably Apache (as I suspect other projects use Spring) would
> need to build its own version from their source code and store it in our
> Maven repositories, and yes, as usual, deliver it along with the CXF
> download.
>
> Keep in mind, removing Spring from CXF is not a victory either. We would
> have to reinvent the wheel in creating our own framework, and, unlike
> Spring's, the new framework would not be one readily understood by thousands
> in the community (hence fewer patches and enhancements from them), nor would
> it be as well tested and beaten-up as Spring's is, because it would be in
> use by only one project. Usage of Spring is a major differentiator between
> Metro and CXF, do you want a web service stack that relies on a tested and
> proven framework, or do you want one that needs to reinvent the wheel to
> some degree in order to avoid a Spring dependency? Both approaches have
> their happy adherents--while you might be happy with (and indeed need) a web
> service stack that has no org.springframework.* packages within it, others
> might be equally concerned about relying on one that uses org.glen.*
> instead.
>
> Glen
>
>
>
>
> CXF Explorer wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I am a newbie for CXF. I started exploring it as a potential framework for
>> implementing web service based application. I am ok with most of the stuff
>> with CSX but for its heavy dependency on Spring framework. I am aware
>> about the availability of bus and NonSpringServlet approach and would like
>> to explore it further. The forum says that most of the advanced cases will
>> require spring or doing a lot of low level API programming to get it
>> configured. That means I cannot keep away with Spring if I want to harness
>> the real potential of CXF framework :-(.
>>
>> With the new
>> http://www.springsource.com/products/enterprise/maintenancepolicy
>> SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy , it looks like non subscribed
>> spring developers(I believe there are many of them) are going to have a
>> hard time identifying a stable spring release, as the spring source will
>> issue maintenance updates for three months period after a new major
>> version of Spring is released. My understanding of the policy may not be
>> 100% correct, but if it is correct, then how CXF is planning repository
>> management for Spring versions? The question is more serious for an Ant
>> based project as the dependencies have to be managed manually there.
>>
>> Will CXF bundle a stable Spring release along with the jar distributions
>> for CXF framework in the future or will it rely on Maven to resolve the
>> Spring dependencies for a particular stable release?
>>
>>
>
>
--
B.Sc. Richard Opalka
Senior Software Engineer
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
Mobile: +420 731 186 942
Mail: ropalka@redhat.com
Re: Potential impact of SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy
on CXF
Posted by Glen Mazza <gl...@gmail.com>.
By reading the FAQ, it shows that we will always have access to the source
code for a particular build, but not just the compiled version after three
months. Presumably Apache (as I suspect other projects use Spring) would
need to build its own version from their source code and store it in our
Maven repositories, and yes, as usual, deliver it along with the CXF
download.
Keep in mind, removing Spring from CXF is not a victory either. We would
have to reinvent the wheel in creating our own framework, and, unlike
Spring's, the new framework would not be one readily understood by thousands
in the community (hence fewer patches and enhancements from them), nor would
it be as well tested and beaten-up as Spring's is, because it would be in
use by only one project. Usage of Spring is a major differentiator between
Metro and CXF, do you want a web service stack that relies on a tested and
proven framework, or do you want one that needs to reinvent the wheel to
some degree in order to avoid a Spring dependency? Both approaches have
their happy adherents--while you might be happy with (and indeed need) a web
service stack that has no org.springframework.* packages within it, others
might be equally concerned about relying on one that uses org.glen.*
instead.
Glen
CXF Explorer wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I am a newbie for CXF. I started exploring it as a potential framework for
> implementing web service based application. I am ok with most of the stuff
> with CSX but for its heavy dependency on Spring framework. I am aware
> about the availability of bus and NonSpringServlet approach and would like
> to explore it further. The forum says that most of the advanced cases will
> require spring or doing a lot of low level API programming to get it
> configured. That means I cannot keep away with Spring if I want to harness
> the real potential of CXF framework :-(.
>
> With the new
> http://www.springsource.com/products/enterprise/maintenancepolicy
> SpringSource Enterprise Maintenance Policy , it looks like non subscribed
> spring developers(I believe there are many of them) are going to have a
> hard time identifying a stable spring release, as the spring source will
> issue maintenance updates for three months period after a new major
> version of Spring is released. My understanding of the policy may not be
> 100% correct, but if it is correct, then how CXF is planning repository
> management for Spring versions? The question is more serious for an Ant
> based project as the dependencies have to be managed manually there.
>
> Will CXF bundle a stable Spring release along with the jar distributions
> for CXF framework in the future or will it rely on Maven to resolve the
> Spring dependencies for a particular stable release?
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Potential-impact-of-SpringSource-Enterprise-Maintenance-Policy-on-CXF-tp19833297p19835875.html
Sent from the cxf-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.