cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Glen Mazza <glen.ma...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Rename "Simple Frontend" --> "No-Annotation Frontend"?
Date Fri, 07 Sep 2012 13:30:33 GMT

Willem.Jiang wrote
> 
> I totally agree with you that we could add a sentence to help people to
> search the simple front end  on the document if they want.  Now my
> question is will we rename the module name of the simple frontend in the
> code ?
> If not, we still need to add a mapping between the code and docs. 
> If so, we need to tell the people to change the poms if they are doing the
> upgrade.
> 

As I said in the proposal, I was just recommending a documentation naming
change with *no* code change, hence no POM changes.  (As the JAX-WS front
end code subclasses the Simple front end classes, calling those classes
"simple" is still OK.)  And, yes, the two doc pages we have on the Simple
front end would have noted they were originally called the simple front end,
but were being renamed so future users aren't being overly encouraged to use
that front end.


Willem.Jiang wrote
> 
> The meaning of "simple" I think that is you don't need to configure any
> thing and it just runs, it is the KISS principle that we alway apply
> during our open source development process. But it could be dumb as CXF
> cannot know every thing he need to build up a right service module in the
> run time. That is why we need the JAXWS frontend. 
> 

Actually, I think we need the JAX-WS frontend to pass the TCK.  :)  The
simple frontend helps a little but not much with "don't need to configure
any thing and it just runs"--it just doesn't use annotations, shifting
configuration instead to XML files (which you can mostly do with the JAX-WS
front end), so you still need to configure the web service.

But, the docs have already said for two years now that everyone should first
start with the JAX-WS front end, and it's already our default when you use
the wsdl2java tools.  So I guess we can continue to name it the Simple front
end without much lost.


Willem.Jiang wrote
> 
> So I still opposite the proposal of rename the "Simple Frontend".
> 

OK, I'll keep it Simple Front End then.

Regards,
Glen




--
View this message in context: http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Rename-Simple-Frontend-No-Annotation-Frontend-tp5713384p5713701.html
Sent from the cxf-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Mime
View raw message