It was proposed to consider switching to Saxon, since Xalan has
basically been dead since 2007.  Saxon apears to include a
TransformerFactoryImpl (though I don't have any idea as to completeness
of compatibility).

On 05/29/2015 08:30 AM, Jason T. Greene wrote:
> The only reason we need Xalan is to provide a jaxp impl of transformer. Ideally we could just rely on the JDK, which uses a fork of xalan, but the translet code which is compiled by it is not compatible with modular classloading. So we just need that one patch. As of late the JDK fork is more current, so we could potentially switch to a fork of it instead. Since Java 9 is moving to modularity, I imagine they would fix the same issue, we could also send them a patch.
>
>> On May 29, 2015, at 8:21 AM, Carlo de Wolf <cdewolf@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> We are keeping a (old) fork around for Xalan. Now and then the question
>> pops whether we can backport more from upstream. Rather I want to rid of
>> it at all as I don't want to maintain forks of third party projects and
>> I don't see Xalan releasing soon with anything we would upstream.
>>
>> Can we remove Xalan? (Maybe we have some weird dependency on specifics.)
>> What should be its replacement?
>>
>> Filed https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-4704 to note any decisions.
>>
>> Carlo
>> _______________________________________________
>> wildfly-dev mailing list
>> wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> wildfly-dev mailing list
> wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>

--
- DML

_______________________________________________
wildfly-dev mailing list
wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev