cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Julien Vey <Julien....@bull.net>
Subject Re: CXF-DOSGi passing the OSGi Remote Services and Remote Service Admin CT
Date Fri, 04 Jun 2010 12:50:20 GMT
Le 04/06/2010 14:32, David Bosschaert a écrit :
> Yes, if the configuration type was called org.apache.cxf then the
> configuration for it is allowed to be called org.apache.cxf.something.
>
> I guess I'm wondering whether this is worth the effort though.
> Originally the configuration type was called 'pojo'. When we moved to
> org.apache.cxf.ws we made sure 'pojo' continued to work as
> backward-compatibility measure in case people were using it. I think
> if we move to org.apache.cxf instead of org.apache.cxf.ws we should
> again keep backward compatibility, which in itself means a lot of
> duplication...
>
> Cheers,
>
> David
>    

Yes I agree
Maybe would it be better to keep it the way it is for now and introduce
this new configuration for a future major release.

Cheers,

Julien

> On 4 June 2010 13:26, Julien Vey<Julien.Vey@bull.net>  wrote:
>    
>> Le 04/06/2010 14:20, Sergey Beryozkin a écrit :
>>      
>>> Well, actually it does break compliance as the spec says that the
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>>>> properties should be called:
>>>> <configuration-type>.something
>>>>
>>>> Given that the configuration type is called org.apache.cxf.ws the
>>>> property should be called org.apache.cxf.ws.<something>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, I understand that. See, I was trying to explore if we could avoid
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> adding the properties which are not specific to a given type, given that
>>> we
>>> are still in an org.apache.cfx space - it's hard to see any practical
>>> negative side-effects...But I'm sorted...
>>>
>>> Generally speaking, I agree the compliance has to be a top priority. But
>>> even RI can benefit from adding extensions.
>>>
>>> thanks, Sergey
>>>
>>>        
>> Isn't it possible to call the configuration-type  org.apache.cxf
>> and then add a property such as "org.apache.cxf.type = rs | ws"
>>
>> So it would be possible to have properties org.apache.cxf.port,
>> org.apache.cxf.address which wouldn't break compliance
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Julien
>>      
>>>
>>>        
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>          
>>>
>>>        
>>
>>      
>
>    


Mime
View raw message