You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cxf.apache.org by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> on 2019/06/01 08:57:26 UTC
Re: Can LoggingFeature not depend on javax.xml.ws?
Converted it to a PR -> https://github.com/apache/cxf/pull/561
For now i'm waiting for some CI feedback but basic mecanism is functional
:).
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 19:50, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> a
écrit :
> Here is a draft - I didn't rerun the build but wanted to share the idea:
> https://github.com/rmannibucau/cxf/commit/53c3c7016ce72dab61035a5417a7bba448fc3e43.
> The pattern is the same for all: add a nested Portable feature which is
> preferred for jaxrs over jaxws.
>
> Do you think we can get a fix for the original soon - this one or another?
> On my side I'd love to drop jaxws dead dependency ASAP in my apps which
> are using logging feature and gzip feature.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>
>
> Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 18:38, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
>> Created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8053 to try to
>> summarize it, feel free to comment/adjust the description if I miss
>> anything.
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
>> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>>
>>
>> Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 18:17, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> a écrit :
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > On May 31, 2019, at 11:09 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hmm, wouldn't a jaxws factory be a good replacement. So plan would be
>>>
>>> I’d prefer not as then you’d have a different programming model for
>>> jax-ws built in features (MTOMFeature, AddressingFeature) and CXF provided
>>> features. And of course there is the “it would break everyone’s existing
>>> code” issue.
>>>
>>> Having the JAX-WS versions wrapper/delegate to the native versions would
>>> be fine and should be mostly seamless. For the most part, there aren’t
>>> any protected fields or anything that subclasses would be using so it
>>> should work.
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > 1. deprecate current impl
>>> > 2. replace them by CxfFeature native implementations (+ delegation for
>>> 1)
>>> > 3. provide a WSFeature.convert(cxfFeature) factory, also cxf can surely
>>> > wrap them automatically in its impl.
>>> >
>>> > wdyt?
>>> >
>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau <
>>> https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>> | Blog
>>> > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/ <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/>>
>>> | Old Blog
>>> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>>
>>> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau <https://github.com/rmannibucau>>
>>> |
>>> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau <
>>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau>> | Book
>>> > <
>>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>>> <
>>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 17:00, Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org <mailto:
>>> dkulp@apache.org>> a écrit :
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>> On May 31, 2019, at 10:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Was not thinking to drop it from the parent but more to get soap free
>>> >>> flavors of cxf features which would then be usable in jaxrs apps
>>> without
>>> >>> any issue.
>>> >>> In other words we would get a cxf.AbstractCxfFeature used as base
>>> for all
>>> >>> impl and current existing ones would be deprecated and would
>>> delegate to
>>> >>> the new ones. No backward compat issue I think.
>>> >>
>>> >> We cannot deprecate them as they would still be required for JAX-WS
>>> >> users. We then have extra naming issues which can be confusing.
>>> >> “LoggingFeature” is the jax-ws one, what is the non-jax-ws one called?
>>> >> Maybe prefix them all with CXF like “CXFLoggingFeature”.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Daniel Kulp
>>> >> dkulp@apache.org <ma...@apache.org> <mailto:dkulp@apache.org
>>> <ma...@apache.org>> - http://dankulp.com/blog <
>>> http://dankulp.com/blog> <
>>> >> http://dankulp.com/blog <http://dankulp.com/blog>>
>>> >> Talend Community Coder - http://talend.com <http://talend.com/> <
>>> http://coders.talend.com/ <http://coders.talend.com/>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Daniel Kulp
>>> dkulp@apache.org <ma...@apache.org> - http://dankulp.com/blog <
>>> http://dankulp.com/blog>
>>> Talend Community Coder - http://talend.com <http://coders.talend.com/>
>>>
>>
Re: Can LoggingFeature not depend on javax.xml.ws?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
And it is blue/green (https://builds.apache.org/job/CXF-Trunk-PR/1206/) :)
Le sam. 1 juin 2019 à 10:57, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> a
écrit :
> Converted it to a PR -> https://github.com/apache/cxf/pull/561
> For now i'm waiting for some CI feedback but basic mecanism is functional
> :).
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>
>
> Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 19:50, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
>> Here is a draft - I didn't rerun the build but wanted to share the idea:
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau/cxf/commit/53c3c7016ce72dab61035a5417a7bba448fc3e43.
>> The pattern is the same for all: add a nested Portable feature which is
>> preferred for jaxrs over jaxws.
>>
>> Do you think we can get a fix for the original soon - this one or another?
>> On my side I'd love to drop jaxws dead dependency ASAP in my apps which
>> are using logging feature and gzip feature.
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
>> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>>
>>
>> Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 18:38, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>> a écrit :
>>
>>> Created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8053 to try to
>>> summarize it, feel free to comment/adjust the description if I miss
>>> anything.
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
>>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
>>> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>>> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>>>
>>>
>>> Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 18:17, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> a écrit :
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > On May 31, 2019, at 11:09 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Hmm, wouldn't a jaxws factory be a good replacement. So plan would be
>>>>
>>>> I’d prefer not as then you’d have a different programming model for
>>>> jax-ws built in features (MTOMFeature, AddressingFeature) and CXF provided
>>>> features. And of course there is the “it would break everyone’s existing
>>>> code” issue.
>>>>
>>>> Having the JAX-WS versions wrapper/delegate to the native versions
>>>> would be fine and should be mostly seamless. For the most part, there
>>>> aren’t any protected fields or anything that subclasses would be using so
>>>> it should work.
>>>>
>>>> Dan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > 1. deprecate current impl
>>>> > 2. replace them by CxfFeature native implementations (+ delegation
>>>> for 1)
>>>> > 3. provide a WSFeature.convert(cxfFeature) factory, also cxf can
>>>> surely
>>>> > wrap them automatically in its impl.
>>>> >
>>>> > wdyt?
>>>> >
>>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau <
>>>> https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>> | Blog
>>>> > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/ <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/>>
>>>> | Old Blog
>>>> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>>
>>>> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau <
>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau>> |
>>>> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau <
>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau>> | Book
>>>> > <
>>>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>>>> <
>>>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 17:00, Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org <mailto:
>>>> dkulp@apache.org>> a écrit :
>>>> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> On May 31, 2019, at 10:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>>> >> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Was not thinking to drop it from the parent but more to get soap
>>>> free
>>>> >>> flavors of cxf features which would then be usable in jaxrs apps
>>>> without
>>>> >>> any issue.
>>>> >>> In other words we would get a cxf.AbstractCxfFeature used as base
>>>> for all
>>>> >>> impl and current existing ones would be deprecated and would
>>>> delegate to
>>>> >>> the new ones. No backward compat issue I think.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> We cannot deprecate them as they would still be required for JAX-WS
>>>> >> users. We then have extra naming issues which can be confusing.
>>>> >> “LoggingFeature” is the jax-ws one, what is the non-jax-ws one
>>>> called?
>>>> >> Maybe prefix them all with CXF like “CXFLoggingFeature”.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> --
>>>> >> Daniel Kulp
>>>> >> dkulp@apache.org <ma...@apache.org> <mailto:dkulp@apache.org
>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> - http://dankulp.com/blog <
>>>> http://dankulp.com/blog> <
>>>> >> http://dankulp.com/blog <http://dankulp.com/blog>>
>>>> >> Talend Community Coder - http://talend.com <http://talend.com/> <
>>>> http://coders.talend.com/ <http://coders.talend.com/>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Daniel Kulp
>>>> dkulp@apache.org <ma...@apache.org> - http://dankulp.com/blog <
>>>> http://dankulp.com/blog>
>>>> Talend Community Coder - http://talend.com <http://coders.talend.com/>
>>>>
>>>