Jervis, I decided that CXF-1232 was to a first approximation a bug in my brain more than a bug in the code. See CXF-1235 for the improved version.
If we decide to act on 1235, of course we don't want to blow up JRA in the process. However, I think that the idea here will be to put different information into the MessagePartInfo for the case in question rather than change the interpretation of what is there now. I was trying to do that when JRA imploded on my head. --benson > -----Original Message----- > From: Liu, Jervis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 12:22 AM > To: [email protected]; Daniel Kulp > Subject: RE: JRA puzzle > > Hi Benson, can I have your patch for cxf-1232 please, so that > I can try it out by myself to see what exactly the problem > is. Can I also have the name of failed JRA tests? > > Cheers, > Jervis > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Benson Margulies [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 2007年11月25日 7:33 > > To: [email protected]; Daniel Kulp > > Subject: JRA puzzle > > > > I had a long struggle with CXF-1232. I came up with a fix. > > > > Only problem is, it busts the JRA tests. > > > > JRA expects not to get elements for parts. > > > > But, ordinary Doc/Lit/Wrapped methods with no @RequestWrapper need > > them to get the element names right when they are specified with > > @WebParam. > > > > There has to be some way for the > reflectionServiceFactoryBean to tell > > that this is going on, but I have yet to figure out what it is. If > > anyone can suggest to me how RSFB (as subclassed for JAXWS, > which is > > the structure of things in the JRA test) can tell that > there are these > > JRA annotations around, I'd be grateful. > > > > ---------------------------- > IONA Technologies PLC (registered in Ireland) Registered > Number: 171387 Registered Address: The IONA Building, > Shelbourne Road, Dublin 4, Ireland >
