Re: Xerces 2.12 release date

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Xerces 2.12 release date

Jan Tosovsky-2
On 2017-04-20 Mukul Gandhi wrote:
>
> Xerces-J 2.12.0 would comprise of two Xerces-J releases:
>
> One release will be from the trunk ... and its XML Schema component
> will be at 1.0 level. This release would run on JDK 1.3 min.
>
> Another release ... will provide support for XML Schema 1.1.
> This release would run on JDK 1.4 min.

It sounds like artificial splitting just to keep support for Java 1.3...

From end-user point of view I would be confused when browsing maven
repository. I would have to find some documentation and investigate the
purpose of each version...

Java 1.3? In my POV the support for EOLed versions of (any) software is
beneficial only for attackers as they have easier way to compromise the
target system.

Switching to more recent Java version could help in fixing issues like this:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1598

Jan


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Xerces 2.12 release date

Gary Gregory-4
Java 9 won't even compile for Java 5 (which is EOL and not under support from Oracle, not sure about IBM). I think dropping Java 1.3 is perfectly OK.

Gary

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Jan Tosovsky <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 2017-04-20 Mukul Gandhi wrote:
>
> Xerces-J 2.12.0 would comprise of two Xerces-J releases:
>
> One release will be from the trunk ... and its XML Schema component
> will be at 1.0 level. This release would run on JDK 1.3 min.
>
> Another release ... will provide support for XML Schema 1.1.
> This release would run on JDK 1.4 min.

It sounds like artificial splitting just to keep support for Java 1.3...

From end-user point of view I would be confused when browsing maven
repository. I would have to find some documentation and investigate the
purpose of each version...

Java 1.3? In my POV the support for EOLed versions of (any) software is
beneficial only for attackers as they have easier way to compromise the
target system.

Switching to more recent Java version could help in fixing issues like this:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1598

Jan


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Xerces 2.12 release date

Christophe Marchand
+1
Christophe

Le 2017-06-06 01:40, Gary Gregory a écrit :

> Java 9 won't even compile for Java 5 (which is EOL and not under
> support from Oracle, not sure about IBM). I think dropping Java 1.3 is
> perfectly OK.
>
> Gary
>
> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Jan Tosovsky <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2017-04-20 Mukul Gandhi wrote:
>>>
>>> Xerces-J 2.12.0 would comprise of two Xerces-J releases:
>>>
>>> One release will be from the trunk ... and its XML Schema
>> component
>>> will be at 1.0 level. This release would run on JDK 1.3 min.
>>>
>>> Another release ... will provide support for XML Schema 1.1.
>>> This release would run on JDK 1.4 min.
>>
>> It sounds like artificial splitting just to keep support for Java
>> 1.3...
>>
>> From end-user point of view I would be confused when browsing maven
>> repository. I would have to find some documentation and investigate
>> the
>> purpose of each version...
>>
>> Java 1.3? In my POV the support for EOLed versions of (any) software
>> is
>> beneficial only for attackers as they have easier way to compromise
>> the
>> target system.
>>
>> Switching to more recent Java version could help in fixing issues
>> like this:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1598 [1]
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1598

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Xerces 2.12 release date

Mukul Gandhi
I'm waiting to see the release of Xerces-J 2.12.0 out. Let's try to give it to the community.

On 6 June 2017 at 11:57, <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1
Christophe


Le 2017-06-06 01:40, Gary Gregory a écrit :
Java 9 won't even compile for Java 5 (which is EOL and not under
support from Oracle, not sure about IBM). I think dropping Java 1.3 is
perfectly OK.

Gary

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Jan Tosovsky <[hidden email]>
wrote:

On 2017-04-20 Mukul Gandhi wrote:

Xerces-J 2.12.0 would comprise of two Xerces-J releases:

One release will be from the trunk ... and its XML Schema
component
will be at 1.0 level. This release would run on JDK 1.3 min.

Another release ... will provide support for XML Schema 1.1.
This release would run on JDK 1.4 min.

It sounds like artificial splitting just to keep support for Java
1.3...

From end-user point of view I would be confused when browsing maven
repository. I would have to find some documentation and investigate
the
purpose of each version...

Java 1.3? In my POV the support for EOLed versions of (any) software
is
beneficial only for attackers as they have easier way to compromise
the
target system.

Switching to more recent Java version could help in fixing issues
like this:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1598 [1]

Jan





--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Xerces 2.12 release date

Mukul Gandhi-4
I'm waiting to see the release of Xerces-J 2.12.0 out. Let's try to give it to the community.

On 6 June 2017 at 11:57, <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1
Christophe


Le 2017-06-06 01:40, Gary Gregory a écrit :
Java 9 won't even compile for Java 5 (which is EOL and not under
support from Oracle, not sure about IBM). I think dropping Java 1.3 is
perfectly OK.

Gary

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Jan Tosovsky <[hidden email]>
wrote:

On 2017-04-20 Mukul Gandhi wrote:

Xerces-J 2.12.0 would comprise of two Xerces-J releases:

One release will be from the trunk ... and its XML Schema
component
will be at 1.0 level. This release would run on JDK 1.3 min.

Another release ... will provide support for XML Schema 1.1.
This release would run on JDK 1.4 min.

It sounds like artificial splitting just to keep support for Java
1.3...

From end-user point of view I would be confused when browsing maven
repository. I would have to find some documentation and investigate
the
purpose of each version...

Java 1.3? In my POV the support for EOLed versions of (any) software
is
beneficial only for attackers as they have easier way to compromise
the
target system.

Switching to more recent Java version could help in fixing issues
like this:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1598 [1]

Jan




--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Xerces 2.12 release date

Jan Tosovsky-2
In reply to this post by Mukul Gandhi
On 2017-06-07 Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> I'm waiting to see the release of Xerces-J 2.12.0 out. Let's try to
> give it to the community.

Would it be possible to integrate the patch for https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1102 ?

Thanks,
Jan




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Xerces 2.12 release date

Mukul Gandhi-4
In reply to this post by Jan Tosovsky-2
How about making the contents of trunk to that of current branch xml-schema-1.1-dev, and declare the min JDK level to 1.4?

In case we do this, we can delete the branch xml-schema-1.1-dev later. To reiterate, the xml-schema-1.1-dev branch supports both XML Schema 1.1 and 1.0 (i.e it also has all the functionality of the current trunk).

I think, this will simplify our source code repository.


--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Xerces 2.12 release date

Michael Glavassevich-3
I'm pretty sure that was always the intention, to merge the XML Schema 1.1 branch on to the trunk when it became stable. I haven't looked at the branch in awhile, but I assume there's a bit of clean up / synchronization work that should be done before making that move.

Thanks.

Michael Glavassevich
XML Technologies and WAS Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: [hidden email]

E-mail: [hidden email]

Mukul Gandhi <[hidden email]> wrote on 06/08/2017 12:23:32 AM:

> From: Mukul Gandhi <[hidden email]>

> To: [hidden email]
> Cc: Gary Gregory <[hidden email]>
> Date: 06/08/2017 12:24 AM
> Subject: Re: Xerces 2.12 release date
>
> How about making the contents of trunk to that of current
> branch xml-schema-1.1-dev, and declare the min JDK level to 1.4?

>
> In case we do this, we can delete the branch xml-schema-1.1-dev
> later. To reiterate, the xml-schema-1.1-dev branch supports both XML
> Schema 1.1 and 1.0 (i.e it also has all the functionality of the
> current trunk).

>
> I think, this will simplify our source code repository.
>
> --

> Regards,
> Mukul Gandhi

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Xerces 2.12 release date

Michael Glavassevich-3
In reply to this post by Jan Tosovsky-2
The division between the trunk and the XML Schema 1.1 branch never had anything to do with Java versions. The branch was a place for experimental development while the XML Schema 1.1 specification was still in flux. We made several "beta" releases for users with an understanding that the XML Schema 1.1 version of Xerces was a work in progress and along the way picked up a dependency (the XPath 2.0 library from Eclipse) that required Java 1.4+ to run. Now that the XML Schema 1.1 spec and development are complete we shouldn't need the split release anymore.

What ends up actually happening depends on everyone's bandwidth. I hope it's not a secret to anyone that development activity (commits going into SVN) for Xerces-J has been quite low for several years. Folks aren't finding the time to do much coding. If uniting the branch with the trunk becomes another thing delaying Xerces-J 2.12 then perhaps it's better to continue releasing the two sets of packages than not having a release at all.

Thanks.

Michael Glavassevich
XML Technologies and WAS Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: [hidden email]

E-mail: [hidden email]

"Jan Tosovsky" <[hidden email]> wrote on 06/05/2017 06:23:30 PM:

> From: "Jan Tosovsky" <[hidden email]>

> To: <[hidden email]>
> Date: 06/05/2017 06:23 PM
> Subject: Re: Xerces 2.12 release date
>

> On 2017-04-20 Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> >
> > Xerces-J 2.12.0 would comprise of two Xerces-J releases:
> >
> > One release will be from the trunk ... and its XML Schema component
> > will be at 1.0 level. This release would run on JDK 1.3 min.
> >
> > Another release ... will provide support for XML Schema 1.1.
> > This release would run on JDK 1.4 min.
>
> It sounds like artificial splitting just to keep support for Java 1.3...
>
> From end-user point of view I would be confused when browsing maven
> repository. I would have to find some documentation and investigate the
> purpose of each version...
>
> Java 1.3? In my POV the support for EOLed versions of (any) software is
> beneficial only for attackers as they have easier way to compromise the
> target system.
>
> Switching to more recent Java version could help in fixing issues like this:
>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1598
>
> Jan
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Xerces 2.12 release date

Gary Gregory-4
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Michael Glavassevich <[hidden email]> wrote:
The division between the trunk and the XML Schema 1.1 branch never had anything to do with Java versions. The branch was a place for experimental development while the XML Schema 1.1 specification was still in flux. We made several "beta" releases for users with an understanding that the XML Schema 1.1 version of Xerces was a work in progress and along the way picked up a dependency (the XPath 2.0 library from Eclipse) that required Java 1.4+ to run. Now that the XML Schema 1.1 spec and development are complete we shouldn't need the split release anymore.

What ends up actually happening depends on everyone's bandwidth. I hope it's not a secret to anyone that development activity (commits going into SVN) for Xerces-J has been quite low for several years. Folks aren't finding the time to do much coding. If uniting the branch with the trunk becomes another thing delaying Xerces-J 2.12 then perhaps it's better to continue releasing the two sets of packages than not having a release at all.

Personally, I'd rather see releases sooner than later. I would guess folks (like me) would rather see RERO with bug fixes than a longer wait in order to pick up the XML Schema 1.1 branch.

2c,
Gary

 


Thanks.

Michael Glavassevich
XML Technologies and WAS Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: [hidden email]

E-mail: [hidden email]

"Jan Tosovsky" <[hidden email]> wrote on 06/05/2017 06:23:30 PM:

> From: "Jan Tosovsky" <[hidden email]>

> To: <[hidden email]>
> Date: 06/05/2017 06:23 PM
> Subject: Re: Xerces 2.12 release date
>

> On 2017-04-20 Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> >
> > Xerces-J 2.12.0 would comprise of two Xerces-J releases:
> >
> > One release will be from the trunk ... and its XML Schema component
> > will be at 1.0 level. This release would run on JDK 1.3 min.
> >
> > Another release ... will provide support for XML Schema 1.1.
> > This release would run on JDK 1.4 min.
>
> It sounds like artificial splitting just to keep support for Java 1.3...
>
> From end-user point of view I would be confused when browsing maven
> repository. I would have to find some documentation and investigate the
> purpose of each version...
>
> Java 1.3? In my POV the support for EOLed versions of (any) software is
> beneficial only for attackers as they have easier way to compromise the
> target system.
>
> Switching to more recent Java version could help in fixing issues like this:
>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1598
>
> Jan
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]