cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Willem Jiang <willem.ji...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Fun with the survey
Date Wed, 29 Sep 2010 02:10:10 GMT
On 9/29/10 4:06 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> On Monday 27 September 2010 9:44:25 pm Benson Margulies wrote:
>> It looks like our close and personal relationship with Spring
>> continues to really inconvenience very few and serve the majority. I
>> wonder if we would want to invest energy in merely designing some
>> scheme to make Spring more removable to assist some volunteer in
>> working on it?
>
> Well, this is something I keep thinking about quite a lot latetly.   There are
> several areas where we use Spring and expose spring to the user:
>
>
> 1) Wiring our own bus together
>
> 2) Providing configuration and namespace handlers and such for the user to
> more easily use CXF with spring
>
> 3) Using/abusing the spring aop stuff for things like transactions and
> sessions scopes and such
>
> 4) JMS transport
>
>
> I really don't want to touch on #4.  Even the JMS guys say Spring JMS is the
> way to go to get JMS done correctly.
>
> For #3, we do provide some factories for some of the scopes and such, but
> again, spring does much of that so much better.
>
> Everything done for #2 there are good API's (that the spring things call) and
> thus can be done programatically.   If someone has a different config
> mechanism, it's not hard to create a new one.
>
> That really leaves #1.  We DO provide a non-spring version of the bus (The
> ExtensionBus stuff), but it has a bunch of limitations in what it can pick up
> and wire together and such.  Much of the SecPolicy stuff won't work for
> example.   This is something I was THINKING about looking at more for 2.4,
> partially to make things much more OSGi friendly where the various modules can
> be relatively independent bundles that an "OSGIBus" could grab via tha OSGi
> registries and such.    Yea.  Brain is noodling, but hasn't gotten very far
> yet.
>

+1 for the OSGiBus idea, I saw lots of customer issues about using a 
wrong bus configurations in OSGi. We could do some work to make life 
easier :)

-- 
Willem
----------------------------------
Open Source Integration: http://www.fusesource.com
Blog:    http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English)
          http://jnn.javaeye.com (Chinese)
Twitter: http://twitter.com/willemjiang

Mime
View raw message