Re: [jboss-as7-dev] Removing JAXR & backward compatiblity

Yeah, I was thinking they could just be aliases or stubs though. On 03/01/2013 02:22 PM, Brian Stansberry wrote: > In terms of code organization, perhaps. But the way the extension is > activated in the HCs and servers is via the module name. So if you want > a 7.2 server to be able to run CMP, there is going to have to be a > module named org.jboss.as.cmp. > > On 3/1/13 2:13 PM, David M. Lloyd wrote: >> I wonder - should we retain a skeletal version of each of these modules? >> I was thinking maybe it would be better to maintain one big >> "removed-subsystems" or "compat-subsystems" module or something like >> that where we can neatly/consistently organize all the model stuff for >> these removals. >> >> On 03/01/2013 09:39 AM, Brian Stansberry wrote: >>> Thanks Thomas, for raising this and for the JIRA. >>> >>> I've outlined what I think is needed for the stub extensions as a >>> comment on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AS7-6656 . >>> >>> Can I request that folks hold up on deleting these subsystems? I think >>> it will be easier to make these changes and then delete the unneeded >>> runtime stuff than it will be to semi-restore from history and then change. >>> >>> The ones that have already been deleted, it's no big deal. >>> >>> On 2/28/13 10:35 AM, Thomas Diesler wrote: >>>> Ok, stub extensions is the obvious alternative to breaking compatibility. I'll leave this as a future task and create a jira for it if that's ok with you. >>>> >>>> cheers >>>> --thomas >>>> >>>> On Feb 28, 2013, at 4:22 PM, David M. Lloyd <david.lloyd(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 02/28/2013 05:57 AM, Thomas Diesler wrote: >>>>>> Folks, >>>>>> >>>>>> related to >>>>>> >>>>>> * [AS7-6612 <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AS7-6612>] Remove JAXR support >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd like to know whether we need to preserve backward compatibility of >>>>>> the configuration and if so what should happen if there is a jaxr config >>>>>> item? Generally, can AS8 break backward compatibility with respect to >>>>>> the config? >>>>> >>>>> Brian points out that we don't have a specific requirement to maintain >>>>> compatibility with obsolete subsystems. I think we could go ahead with >>>>> the removal (granted part of the reason I feel this way is that I've >>>>> already removed JSR-88...). >>>>> >>>>> Going forward though Kabir suggested that if we do want to, say, allow >>>>> 7.x instances to be managed from an 8.x DC, that we should create "stub" >>>>> extensions for the removed stuff that only carry and validate >>>>> configuration but aren't actually supported on 8.x servers. This seems >>>>> like a valid possibility to me. >>>>> -- >>>>> - DML >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> jboss-as7-dev mailing list >>>>> jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev >>>> >>>> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> Thomas Diesler >>>> JBoss OSGi Lead >>>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat >>>> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> jboss-as7-dev mailing list >>>> jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >