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

[David M. Lloyd]

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 at redhat.com> 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 at 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 at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
>>
>
>


-- 
- DML