Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cxf-issues-archive@locus.apache.org Received: (qmail 82507 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2007 10:07:05 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 24 Jul 2007 10:07:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 40955 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jul 2007 10:06:54 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cxf-issues-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 40889 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jul 2007 10:06:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cxf-issues-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cxf-issues@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 40868 invoked by uid 99); 24 Jul 2007 10:06:54 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Jul 2007 03:06:54 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-100.0 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.4] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (140.211.11.4) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Jul 2007 03:06:52 -0700 Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FD547141F0 for ; Tue, 24 Jul 2007 03:06:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4855850.1185271592258.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 03:06:32 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jeff Yu (JIRA)" To: cxf-issues@incubator.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (CXF-803) Configuring interceptors using annotations In-Reply-To: <24952651.1184712664558.JavaMail.jira@brutus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-803?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12514937 ] Jeff Yu commented on CXF-803: ----------------------------- As I looked at Xfire InHandlers and OutHandlers, they are very simple, it just looks up the annotation on the ServiceBean class. (possiblily I might be wrong here) Here I have some questions: 1. Do we just need to implement it as simple as what Xfire does? say, we just need to look up the annotation in the ServiceBean class. 2. If we also support this annotation in the SEI, what if both SEI and implementor specify this annotation, say which one has high priority? what is the correct search order? In fact, I think in most of cases, people would like to have this in the implementor instead of SEI. 3. I think for the CXF, we should also support InFaultInterceptor, OutFaultInterceptor annotation. Zarar, from the maillist, you said you were writing something similiar stuff, have you started working on this JIRA, if not, I think I can pick it up.. > Configuring interceptors using annotations > ------------------------------------------ > > Key: CXF-803 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-803 > Project: CXF > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: Configuration > Affects Versions: 2.0 > Environment: All > Reporter: Zarar Siddiqi > > It would be helpful to configure interceptors using annotations. CXF would benefit by having annotations similar to XFire's org.codehaus.xfire.annotations.InHandlers and org.codehaus.xfire.annotations.OutHandlers as it would allow specifying specific interceptors for service implementations. > This issue came up on the mailing list: http://www.nabble.com/Configuring-interceptors-using-annotations-tf4097300.html > Thanks, > Zarar -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.