On 08/11/2013 6:38 AM, Marek Potociar wrote:
> If you signed, you would be in the signatory list on this page:
> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/community/oca-486395.html (Is this
> you? "Gili Tzabari - JDK Glassfish java.net <http://java.net> - cowwoc")
Correct. So we're good :)
> Yes, independently of our discussion, I have added the task about a
> week ago and targeted it for 2.6 release timeframe -
> https://java.net/jira/browse/JERSEY-2194
Thanks. I've added a watch.
>>>> I understand, but I've seen quite a bit of issues closed as WON'T
>>>> FIX with a comment "this feature has changed in 2.x, as such we
>>>> don't plan to address it in 1.x". It feels like you're pushing
>>>> users to upgrade but 2.x isn't actually ready for production due to
>>>> the aforementioned issues. I don't think you should be pushing
>>>> users to 2.x until all 1.x features are migrated. It feels like
>>>> we're being stuck between a rock and a hard place.
>>>
>>> As much as we try to provide support to Jersey community, I strongly
>>> disagree with your view on Jersey 2.x not being production ready.
>>> Just because we currently lack extension support of a few of your
>>> favourite libraries, which have been somewhat (but not necessarily
>>> in all the main scenarios) supported in Jersey 1.x, that does not
>>> make Jersey 2.x less production ready.
>>
>> Marek, I'm sorry but I don't believe I'm the only one who feels this
>> way. I've discussed this topic off-list and others have expressed the
>> opinion that Jersey 2.x was released prematurely. I'm not saying this
>> to blame anyone. I just want you to understand that although many of
>> us would like to upgrade to 2.0, we feel that we're simply not able
>> to yet.
>
> I am not suggesting that you would be alone in your feelings or that
> you should not feel that you cannot move your project to Jersey 2.x. I
> completely understand that Jersey 2.x may not feel ready for those who
> heavily depends on Guice or Spring or some other contributed Jersey
> 1.x extension that has not been 1:1 ported to 2.x (yet). And I am not
> happy that we were not able to fully port all the extensions to Jersey
> 2.x so far.
>
> Yet, making bold statements about Jersey 2.x not being production
> ready is something I simply cannot agree. Production readiness is not
> about being on par with support for community-contributed extensions.
> There's a big difference between a missing extension feature and
> production readiness.
>
> Of course, community can expect us to quickly address any functional
> or performance bugs in the core Jersey modules (as Jersey 2.x is a
> complete rewrite, mostly "from scratch" to fit in the async
> server-side support and other features and we have not yet found a way
> how to write a bug-free code).
> OTOH, our resources are not unlimited and as such we expect community
> to help us with porting some of the non-essential extensions. We are
> also open to any feedback, suggestions or discussions around design or
> API improvements.
> So what is your design-level proposal? (Let's move it to a new thread,
> if you have a proposal to discuss.)
Okay.
Gili