cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andreas Veithen <andreas.veit...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Date Wed, 08 Dec 2010 23:29:13 GMT
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 22:58, Craig Tataryn <craiger@tataryn.net> wrote:
>
> On 2010-12-08, at 3:33 PM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>
>> Looks like you made the same mistake that I've seen elsewhere: instead
>> of just installing the Web services feature pack on WAS 6.1 (to get
>> JAX-WS support) and let the IBM support take care of the issues (after
>> all that is what they are payed for), you spent your time trying to
>> integrate another SOAP stack and solve the issues yourself. That being
>> said, I don't know if the feature pack already existed when you did
>> your project, and of course for a contractor that is the more
>> interesting option (I would do the same in that position ;-). But OK,
>> let's not transform this thread into a discussion about how to deploy
>> Web services on WAS...
>>
>> Andreas
>>
>
> I might have confused the article with another? I still stand by my statements.  I don't
want to use "Webservices Pack for WAS".  I want to use "works regardless of servlet container
and support contract".  So it was not a "mistake", I fully intended to avoid the Webservices
Pack.
>
> Craig.

This is again a misleading statement. WAS 6.1 is a J2EE 1.4 compliant
application server and the feature pack adds support for some parts of
JEE5 (in the same way as they have a feature pack to upgrade from EJB
2.1 to 3.0). It doesn't tie you to a particular vendor (in contrast to
what they had in WebSphere 5). So, "works regardless of servlet
container" would really mean "doesn't use JEE5". There are indeed some
arguments in favor of not using JEE5, including the quality of the
implementation in a particular application server or the fact that for
some projects, it doesn't provide enough flexibility.

Andreas

>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 21:26, Craig Tataryn <craiger@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>> We were using WAS 6.1 and we needed to support HL7 payloads.  Axis wasn't up
to snuff. Then trying to get modern versions of JAXB and XML APIs to work with WAS wasted
soooooo much time and money. It was also a main contributor to my hair greying at the tender
age of 34.
>>>
>>> </rant>
>>>
>>> Craig.
>>>
>>> On 2010-12-08, at 2:15 PM, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/09/2010 08:53 AM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 14:40, Craig Tataryn <craiger@tataryn.net>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> That's great, his last article was very helpful at my last contract
in saving me from implementing using "Web Services Pack for WAS" (aka Axis)
>>>>>>
>>>>> Interesting statement. Dennis' last articles were all about comparison
>>>>> between CXF, Rampart and Metro. However, although IBM uses Axis2 as
>>>>> the basis for their JAX-WS support in WAS 7.0 and in the Web services
>>>>> feature pack for WAS 6.1, they're not using Rampart at all, but have
>>>>> their own WS-Security implementation...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I haven't worked with WAS myself, but thought that might be the case.
>>>> That's why I qualify my own rankings of the stacks in the latest article
>>>> with " Also, the rankings apply only to the base open source projects;
>>>> commercial stacks based on the open source versions may use their own
>>>> security code and other extensions. You'll need to look at the
>>>> differences between the commercial code and the open source base to see
>>>> which parts of the rankings may apply."
>>>>
>>>> Andreas, why don't you add a comment to the article pointing out that
>>>> the rankings don't apply to WAS for this reason?
>>>>
>>>>  - Dennis
>>>
>>>
>
>

Mime
View raw message