cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sergey Beryozkin <sberyoz...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: CXF-DOSGi passing the OSGi Remote Services and Remote Service Admin CT
Date Thu, 03 Jun 2010 22:42:09 GMT
Hi David

On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 10:17 PM, David Bosschaert <
david.bosschaert@gmail.com> wrote:

>  >>
> >>
> > - consolidation of DOSGI RI specific properties. Example, you added a
> useful
> > property called "org.apache.cxf.ws.port" so JAXRS endpoints need to
> 'catch
> > up' with "org.apache.cxf.rs.port".
> > Perhaps we can continue adding such 'parallel' properties, but I'm
> > wondering, can "org.apache.cxf.ws.port"
> > be replaced with "org.apache.cxf.endpoint.port" or
> > "org.apache.cxf.http.port" ? Later on, in post 1.2, we can deprecates
> some
> > of other 'duplicate' properties.
>
> >> 3. Anything else?
> Well, the Remote Services Admin spec mandates that the configuration
> properties follow a certain pattern. If the configuration type is
> called org.apache.cxf.ws then its specific configuration variables
> should be called org.apache.cxf.ws.something (see table 122.1 in the
> OSGi 4.2 Enterprise Spec http://www.osgi.org/Download/Release4V42).
> This is to avoid name clashes when you want to expose a service using
> multiple Remote Service implementations that may not be aware of each
> other. So to be compliant we have to live with parallel properties.
>
> Having some properties in the CXF space "org.apache.cxf" seems to be
totally compliant ? Then they can be 'inherited' by cxf.ws, cxf.rs.


> I do agree on matching up the properties where this makes sense across
> org.apache.cxf.ws and org.apache.cxf.rs
>
> So how would you rename a property like "org.apache.cxf.ws.port" ?


>  > - HTTPS support ? May be a discussion on the dev list can be initiated,
> a
> > solution agreed upon and then someone from the community can step forward
> > and work on it ? As a side note, a CXF user has approached me regarding
> > fixing a JAXRS Jettison issue in DOSGI 1.1 (default Jettison provider
> does
> > not work in DOSGi 1.1, needs to be fixed for 1.2 too) so I think there
> are
> > experienced and motivated users who can help...
>
> While I agree that this would be great to have, I'm not sure if we
> should wait for it to be finished. I'm not aware of anyone working on
> this at the moment (please correct me if I'm wrong!). Months of work
> have gone in making CXF-DOSGi compliant with the spec and I don't
> think we should hold releasing this off until a nice piece of
> functionality which hasn't even been started on has been finished.
> There's nothing wrong with releasing often, so if this functionality
> appears we can do a release again, unless someone is already working
> on HTTPS support of course...
>
>
Sure, it's been a big effort indeed. Perhaps HTTPS can even be implemented
'out of band' by users if needed :
http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/SSL+Configuration; future DOSGI
releases may support it at the intents level

thanks, Sergey


> Best regards,
>
> David
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message