We answered this already, right?
Mark.
On 10 Mar 2008, at 13:53, Thomas Diesler wrote:
Hi Folks,
We discussed this topic on Friday last week during our internal team
workshop. As a result we came up with the idea of defining the set
of required functionality for an enterprise ready web service stack
and compare what we currently have in all three stacks. The result
of this comparison would give us a clearer idea of how we want to
move forward and how we distribute our available resources.
http://jbws.dyndns.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=JBossWSSupportedStackCom...
Native is the only certified stack, integration work for WS-TX
pending, weak in the tools area.
CXF has javaee5 certification pending, integration and documentation
of extended functionality pending.
Metro has javaee5 certification pending, integration and
documentation of extended functionality pending. Metro is also
considering their offer complete.
My preferred strategy would be to gradually unlock more of the Metro/
CXF functionality (maybe 20% of our time) and start the TCK effort
for one of the stacks when/if we decide to replace our default
stack. But instead of jumping to a conclusion, I would like to
bounce this back to you for feedback.
cheers
-thomas
Mark Little wrote:
> I would have thought that JBossWS-native is the tier 1 because we
> know we can support it now and then Metro and CXF as tier 2/3.
> Obviously things may change in subsequent releases, as long as
> backward compatibility isn't broken.
> Mark.
> On 6 Mar 2008, at 22:16, Andrig T Miller wrote:
>> Mark and Thomas,
>>
>> Since we all are now on the same page about what version of
>> our WS stack is in AS 5, the question now for EAP 5, is which web
>> service stack, our own JBoss Native, CXF or Metro are we actually
>> going to ship with EAP 5. Of course, whatever version it is needs
>> to pass the Java EE 5 TCK, and not be missing anything we have
>> supported from a feature perspective in previous EAP releases (4.2
>> and 4.3). The consensus, in the discussion so far, is that we
>> also only want to ship one, and hence support one stack.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Andrig (Andy) Miller
>> VP of Engineering
>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
>>
> ----
> Mark Little
> mlittle(a)redhat.com <mailto:mlittle@redhat.com>
> JBoss, a Division of Red Hat
> Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod
> Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom.
> Registered in UK and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903
> Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Charlie Peters (USA), Matt
> Parsons (USA) and Brendan Lane (Ireland).
--
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thomas Diesler
Web Service Lead
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
----
Mark Little
mlittle(a)redhat.com
JBoss, a Division of Red Hat
Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod
Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom.
Registered in UK and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903
Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Charlie Peters (USA), Matt
Parsons (USA) and Brendan Lane (Ireland).