cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Carr <james.r.c...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: How to consume JMS services
Date Mon, 28 Feb 2011 15:29:21 GMT
Even more important... REST over AMQP will be the superior choice in
the future imho. Small messages shared between java and non java
consumers. FTW! :)

On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Bill Burke <bburke@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 2/28/11 6:10 AM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>>
>> Bill,
>>
>> I'm starting a new thread...
>>
>> Comments inline.
>>
>>>
>>> I think its fair to suggest to somebody asking about JMS integration
>>> solutions other than CXF.  We encourage such posts on resteasy mail list.
>>
>
> Especially since hornetq rest can be consumed by CXF.
>
>> Sure - unless we reckon we can provide something meaningful at the CXF
>> level ?
>>
>
> FYI, I've tried very very hard to minimalize, lessen, remove the requirement
> or need for a specific client framework or stack other than HTTP to consume
> hornetq's REST interface.  IMO, anybody writing a REST interface should make
> similar efforts.  Because, otherwise, what's the point?
>
> I also think we have to be very very careful from a REST framework
> perspective to avoid marrying/coupling our frameworks to a developer's
> application.  Once you've created the requirement for a framework to be
> installed both on the client and server, you've done something wrong.
>
> All this is why I piped in when somebody asked about JMS integration.
> Because I believe really strongly about the above.  SOAP+JMS is really a
> consideration only for cross-language/platform interoperability.  REST, IMO,
> is a superior approach because of the reasons listed above.  Since CXF is
> now embracing REST through its JAX-RS implementation, alternatives to
> SOAP-based approaches should be suggested and encouraged, at least by the
> REST guys at CXF ;)
>
>>
>> P.S. Bill - you are welcome to contribute and challenge us on the dev
>> list. Sorry if the previous thread caused you some grief :-). I
>> believe no-one meant anything more than just a protective remark. It
>> is obvious now it turned out to be a highly controversial one but hope
>> such a seasoned professional as you are can accept the attempted
>> clarifications and apologies which followed :-)
>>
>
> My "grief" usually doesn't last more than 2 seconds and I've received much
> much worse grief before.  If I was more professional, and I'm not, I would
> have just ignored Glen's comments.  Instead, I just couldn't resist the urge
> to tweak him, for that I apologize.
>
> --
> Bill Burke
> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
> http://bill.burkecentral.com
>

Mime
View raw message