cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Baptiste Onofré ...@nanthrax.net>
Subject Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification
Date Wed, 05 Oct 2011 17:45:28 GMT
Hi Dan (and Guillaume),

I think it makes more sense to include WS-N in CXF. As the current 
implementation is tied to ActiveMQ, I think it would required some 
enhancement to:
- use a pure JMS implementation, allowing us to use ActiveMQ and any 
other JMS broker (WebSphere MQ Series for instance)
- use a fully OSGi compliant implementation
- be able to describe the WS-N endpoint (poll, etc) in Spring/Blueprint 
CXF and in Camel

I'm ready to help on these topics ;)

My 0.02$
Regards
JB

On 10/05/2011 06:31 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
> Just wanted to mention that Guillaume and I have been chatting a bit about the
> code on the CXF IRC channel today.   He ran into some differences with various
> JAX-WS implementations:
>
> http://irclogs.dankulp.com/logs/irclogger_log/cxf?date=2011-10-05,Wed&sel=128#l124
>
> that required some "less clean" code.   Nothing major.   We also talked about
> the JMS stuff currently being tied to ActiveMQ and options around that:
>
> http://irclogs.dankulp.com/logs/irclogger_log/cxf?date=2011-10-05,Wed&sel=194#l190
>
> That last stuff is definitely not critical (tied to ActiveMQ is perfectly fine
> for now as long as we mention that).
>
> Dan
>
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, October 05, 2011 6:13:15 PM Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 18:01, Daniel Kulp<dkulp@apache.org>  wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, October 05, 2011 5:22:01 PM Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>>> I've started to re-architect the WS-Notification implementation to
>>>> get
>>>
>>> rid
>>>
>>>> of JBI and be pure JAX-WS based.
>>>> The results are available at https://github.com/gnodet/wsn .
>>>> I think there was a consensus to move the code base to CXF, but I
>>>> just
>>>
>>> want
>>>
>>>> to make sure everyone agree.
>>>
>>> I definitely agree.  :-)   Very excited about that prospect.  :-)
>>>
>>> How close to ready is it?   Is it something that we can get into CXF
>>> shortly
>>> for inclusion with CXF 2.5?
>>
>> The code is really the same than in ServiceMix, only the JBI bits have been
>> replaced by JAX-WS.
>> A few tests would definitely help, but the code base itself is mostly done.
>> I recall some users would have been interested in having more features like
>> complex topics or such, but not having those features does not mean the base
>> service is not usable.
>>
>>>> Also, I'd like to keep the implementation lightweight and keep it
>>>> pure
>>>
>>> JAXWS
>>>
>>>> based if possible.
>>>
>>> I'm quite a bit less excited about this.   I would say pure jaxws + cxf-
>>> common-utilities is fine as it should likely use the CXF logging stuff,
>>> CXF XML utilities (DOMUtils, etc...), etc...  duplicating stuff from
>>> common to just avoid a dep is silly to me.
>>
>> Yeah, I meant I'd like to be independent of the jaxws provider.
>> The code is currently using slf4j for logging though.
>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 10:20, Guillaume Nodet<gnodet@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>>> Just want to start a discussion on WS-Notification because I've
>>>>> had a
>>>>> chat last week with a ServiceMix user about that.
>>>>>
>>>>> That component is not heavily used, but we always have a few
>>>>> users
>>>>> reporting bugs and such.   This component is really the only one
>>>>> which is no replacement in Camel.   Given WS-Notification is
>>>>> really just an implementation of a WSDL, I wonder if it would
>>>>> be easier to simply port it to a pure CXF web service so that
>>>>> it would not be tied to JBI anymore, and would also solve a
>>>>> bunch of problems related to the behavior of
>>>>> WS-Addressing inside the JBI bus (which is not really what users
>>>>> expect when using WS-Notification).
>>>>>
>>>>> So I'd like to gauge the interest in re-architecting this
>>>>> component to make it more easily consumable without JBI / NMR,
>>>>> just as a JAX-WS web service (if possible even with no ties to
>>>>> CXF).    We could then maybe plan a few enhancements such as
>>>>> the use of non simple topics definitions and such.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> ------------------------
>>>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>>>> ------------------------
>>>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>>>>> ------------------------
>>>>> Open Source SOA
>>>>> http://fusesource.com
>>>
>>> --
>>> Daniel Kulp
>>> dkulp@apache.org
>>> http://dankulp.com/blog
>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com

-- 
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Mime
View raw message