cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sergey Beryozkin <sberyoz...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: SOAP over JMS and CXF.
Date Fri, 25 Feb 2011 15:51:33 GMT
Hi Guys

Come on, this is not a RESTEasy or HornetQ mailing list.
More comments inline

2011/2/25 Glen Mazza <gmazza@talend.com>:
> Bill, I'm all for plugging but if you could spend some time on fixing
> the five (rather simple) RESTEasy bugs I reported (RESTEAST-494, 495,
> 496, 497, and 502) over a month ago, among the 109 you presently have
> open and unresolved, that would also be good. As the Russian Czar
> learned during WWI, it's not good to go too much on the offensive when
> things are rotting out at home.

I'm not following how it is going to help CXF JAX-RS ? Why don't
discuss it on the RestEasy list ?

>
> Glen
>
> On 2/25/2011 8:47 AM, Bill Burke wrote:
>> That's great but what if your client isn't Java?  Download a SOAP stack
>> and pray its compatible with CXF?
>>
>> Simple HTTP calls are far superior, more lightweight, and easier to
>> code.  Seriously, check out what we've done with the HornetQ REST
>> interface.  Specifically the Javascript and Python examples.  You'll see
>> that zero library downloads and minimal code is all that is required to
>> interface with a fully featured messaging API.

This is the only comment which I can try and put into the CXF context.

CXF SOAP users offers a different view via proxies. They don't write
JMS/messaging-centric code, they write service.addBook(),
service.getBook(). It's a different approach.

Now, Talend Service and Integration Factory distributions show how
plain JMS-centric consumers can talk against CXF JAX-RS endpoints. The
consumers are just plain Java JMS consumers writing basic and simple
JMS code.

In your opinion, why would such (Java) users prefer an HTTP centric
interface for consuming messages backed up by JMS stores, when they
just can do plain Java JMS ?

What do you think ?

>>
>> I'm sorry to plug our stuff here, but, I have to spread the word
>> whenever I see somebody interested in HTTP + messaging.
>>
>> http://jboss.org/hornetq/rest

If people using HornetQ as a messaging solution could plugin CXF
JAX-RS to back up your interface then I'd be the first one who would
blog about it and promote it. On CXF lists we discuss CXF-based issues
or solutions.
Please don't get me wrong Bill :-). I respect your work, I linked to
HornetQ because their slogan is cool and RestEasy from my blog, and
perhaps we can try and arrange some kind of interop event, say with
CXF JAX-RS consuming HornetQ services, but at the moment it's nothing
to do with CXF.

cheers, Sergey

>>
>> On 2/24/11 8:23 PM, Willem Jiang wrote:
>>> CXF JMS transport supports JMS URI which is part of JMS over SOAP spec
>>> out of box. I think you can use it with JAXRS frontend without any
>>> trouble.
>>>
>>> 2011/2/24, robert<robert@gliesian.com>:
>>>> CXF supports SOAP over JMS; http://www.w3.org/TR/soapjms/.
>>>>
>>>> Should the bindings and service extensions defined by this spec be
>>>> better suited in a supported WSDL or WADL?
>>>>
>>>> I assume WADL as supported by CXF?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
> --
> Glen Mazza
> Software Engineer, Talend (http://www.talend.com)
> blog: http://www.jroller.com/gmazza
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message