JSR181 vs. CFX

[Tammo van Lessen <tv...@gmail.com>]

Hi devs,

I just stumbled upon the CFX SE and BC. Is this the intended replacement
for the JSR181 SE and/or the HTTP BC?

Thanks,
  Tammo

Re: JSR181 vs. CFX

[Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>]

CXF SE certainly offers the same kind of feature as JSR181.
The main difference is that it is based on Apache CXF instead of XFire
(XFire is no longer developed and CXF is the next "version").
As these are two really different products, we have created a new SE for it,
because the two products are different enough that the migration may not be
straightforward: for example, CXF is jax-ws compliant, whereas XFire is not,
so you may have different behaviors.

As for CXF BC / HTTP BC, the story is the same but the conclustions are a
bit different: servicemix-http now has new endpoint that can accept
marshalers so that you can handle plain http requests.

Another point is that the two components based on CXF uses the JBI wrapper
defined in the JBI spec to convey soap messages, so the xml data expected or
sent is different from http / jsr181.

That said, I agree there is some confusion here and we need to find a way
about that on the long term.

On Dec 18, 2007 12:42 PM, Tammo van Lessen <tv...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi devs,
>
> I just stumbled upon the CFX SE and BC. Is this the intended replacement
> for the JSR181 SE and/or the HTTP BC?
>
> Thanks,
>  Tammo
>
>


-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/