Hi Dan,
Please forget what I had said about finding the publisher by looking the
namespace. I have no idea to make the cxf-servlet.xml more flexible
now :).
If the cxf-servlet need to keep compatible with the JAX-WS RI, I think
we can set the default publisher to be
org.apache.cxf.jaxws.EndpointPublisherImpl. If CXF-Servlet can't find
the publisher attribute from the endpoint element, we set the publisher
name to be org.apache.cxf.jaxws.EndpointPublisherImpl.
I will update this to my current refactoring work. I hope I can make a
commitment today.
So the only effection of my CXF-Servlet commitment is to change the
servlet-class name from "org.apache.cxf.jaxws.servlet.CXFServlet" to
"org.apache.cxf.transport.servlet.CXFServlet" in the web.xml.
Cheers,
Willem.
Daniel Kulp wrote:
On Sunday 04 February 2007 23:39, Willem Jiang wrote:
Hi Dan,
Yes, If we expose too much detail to the user , it will be painful for
us when we are doing the refactoring stuff.
Current CXF Servlet refactoring just make the Servlet decouple with the
jaxws front end. In this way the servlet need to get to know which
publisher implementing could be used in the servlet.
We can take the publisher as the transport factory and load different
publisher by the namespace which is defined in the cxf-servlet.xml.
Honestly, I have no idea what you just said here.
But we also need to write the servlet class name in Web.xml. Can we make
it parent to the user ?
This is mostly because we try to make the war completely app-server
independent. There are ways to register a context listener (or something,
don't remember exactly what. Tuscany does it.) with tomcat that would allow
the war to not have the web.xml at all. All that would be needed is the
cxf-servlet.xml file.
That said, the web.xml is a straight copy from the one in etc. The user
doesn't have to touch it to get their app working. They don't need to even
know there is a classname in there.
Here is another thought that CXF Servlet also support create the service
by Spring configuration xml. I think we also need to make it
sophisticated to support different front-end.
I'd definitely be OK with this as long as we go the Spring 2.0 route that Dan
has been doing so it's relatively clean looking and not so "springy".
Just FYI: the current format for the cxf-servlet.xml file was used as it's
completely compatible with the JAX-WS RI. If you take the sun-jaxws.xml
from a JAX-WS RI app and rename it to cxf-servlet.xml and change the web.xml
to ours, the apps are supposed to work. (within the limits of the parts of
jax-ws that we currently have working). If we add the "publisher" or
anything to it to distinguish the frontend, we're going to break that anyway.
We might as well go a clean route and use the schema and the Spring 2.0
stuff.
Dan
Cheers,
Willem.
Daniel Kulp wrote:
On Sunday 04 February 2007 20:27, Willem Jiang wrote:
2. cxf-servlet.xml
Adding a publisher attribute in the endpoint element.
It should be publisher="org.apache.cxf.jaxws.EndpointPublisherImpl"
You can find the example from the systest or the kit's samples
hello_world . Please feel free to get touch with me if you have any
issue about the CXF Servlet.
I really don't like this part of this. You end up forcing people to
embed internal class names into the XML file and thus know internal
details about the implementations. It also prevents us from refactoring
things, renaming classes, etc... without breaking the users apps.
This needs to change to some sort of registry system where the frontends
can register a handler to the servlet/bus and the XML just has some sort
of key for the XML. I'd prefer a namespace qualified thing where the
frontend could provide an entire schema for their section of the XML.
If the frontend needs some additional elements in the XML file, they can
do it.
