<div dir="ltr"><div><div>There you go... PR updated to consume the same api jar now released as final.<br><br></div>Cheers<br></div>Alessio<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 3:30 PM, David Lloyd <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:david.lloyd@redhat.com" target="_blank">david.lloyd@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Alessio Soldano <<a href="mailto:asoldano@redhat.com">asoldano@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> As suggested by Brian, I'd like to draw attention to the discussion on<br>
> <a href="https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/10604" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/wildfly/<wbr>wildfly/pull/10604</a> .<br>
> The PR is an upgrade of the webservices stack, including JBossWS, Apache<br>
> CXF, JAXB-RI and JAXB API. In particular, the JAXB upgrade is for EE8 and<br>
> better JDK 9 compatibility.<br>
> Now, due to the upgrade of the JAXB API spec jar, the PR is essentially<br>
> stalled since 20 days; the new spec is released as an alpha (as it's been<br>
> tested within JBossWS only) and that does not satisfy a rule that requires<br>
> any artifact being pulled to be Final.<br>
> We're talking about a spec jar, we could simply re-tag that as Final,<br>
> chances are we won't need changes any time soon there anyway, but as Tomaz<br>
> pointed out, in principle that would be dishonest.<br>
<br>
</span>My opinion is that you should go ahead and make a .Final tag. In the<br>
(unlikely?) event that the spec has to be modified for some reason, I<br>
think you could make a 1.0.1.Final tag and call it a "bug fix".<br>
<br>
The alternative is to simply wait. I don't think there is any middle position.<br>
<span class=""><br>
> While I see the point in requiring that only sufficiently stable upgrades<br>
> are applied to the codebase, I'm wondering whether, maybe, we're going a bit<br>
> too far with the rules. Brian wrote on this topic: "how to determine that<br>
> something is good enough to go in without using master as a test bed" ?<br>
<br>
</span>I don't think we are; I agree with the policy as it stands. If you<br>
look at it in terms of being able to release at any time, then it<br>
follows that everything _must_ be stable.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
- DML<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>