Thx for the replies. Has the design been settled upon? Is there anything that I could help with?
stephen. Jonathan Anstey wrote: > > Hi Stephen, > > I encountered the same problem you are having a while ago now [1]. I did > some initial work on it then but got pulled off onto other things. > Having come back to the issue about a week ago, and realizing that the > old SMX-CXF integration code will be trashed soon [2], I decided to wait > :) BTW the fix that was suggested in [1] did not work for me either. > > Cheers, > Jon > > [1] > http://www.nabble.com/Using-CXF-with-ServiceMix-3.1-tf3352678.html#a9371714 > [2] http://www.nabble.com/ServiceMix---CXF-integration-tf3644400.html > > Bozhong Lin wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This is a known issue for current CXF [1]. The issue is left unfixed >> in RC release since the ServiceMix/CXF integration right now is >> undergoing major changes [2], and there is a possibility the the old >> way of doing Service/CXF integration will be removed. There is also a >> plan to update the sample as soon as the new ServiceMix/CXF >> integration is done Taking this opportunity of change, please feel >> free to send any feedbacks in this area if you have. >> >> Cheers, >> Bo >> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-569 >> [2] http://www.nabble.com/ServiceMix---CXF-integration-tf3644400.html >> >> sgargan wrote: >>> I have been trying to get the JBI integration samples in >>> CXF-2.0-incubator-M1 >>> working with ServiceMix (3.2-Snapshot). I'm using the ant tasks to >>> install >>> and start the CXF engine. It installs correctly but on start I get an >>> exception complaining that >>> Class [org.apache.xbean.spring.context.v2.XBeanNamespaceHandler] >>> does not >>> implement the NamespaceHandler interface >>> >>> It seems to be the same issue as observed in the following thread >>> >>> http://www.nabble.com/Using-CXF-with-ServiceMix-3.1-tf3352678.html#a9371714 >>> >>> >>> According to the post this is due to a mismatch in the versions of >>> spring >>> being used in sm and cxf. As suggested in that thread, I have tried >>> updating >>> the jbi.xml as suggested to load the component first i.e. >>> >>> <jbi version="1" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; >>> xmlns="http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/jbi"; >>> xsi:schemaLocation="http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/jbi ./jbi.xsd"> >>> >>> <component type="service-engine" >>> component-class-loader-delegation="self-first"> <identification> >>> <name>CXFServiceEngine</name> <description>This is a cxf >>> service engine</description> </identification> >>> <component-class-name >>> description="description">org.apache.cxf.jbi.se.CXFServiceEngine</component-class-name> >>> >>> <component-class-path> >>> <path-element>cxf-integration-jbi-2.0-incubator-M1.jar</path-element> >>> <path-element>cxf-incubator.jar</path-element> >>> </component-class-path> >>> <bootstrap-class-name>org.apache.cxf.jbi.se.CXFBootstrap</bootstrap-class-name> >>> >>> <bootstrap-class-path> >>> <path-element>cxf-integration-jbi-2.0-incubator-M1.jar</path-element> >>> <path-element>cxf-incubator.jar</path-element> >>> </bootstrap-class-path> </component> </jbi> >>> >>> But get the same result. Is this the correct was to have the component >>> initialize itself first? >>> Has anyone successfully deployed the examples on a SM instance > 3.0 >>> or have >>> any other ideas how i might resolve this? Any help would be greatly >>> appreciated. >>> >>> Thanks in advance >>> >>> stephen. >>> > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/JBI-Integration-samples-tf3648583.html#a10204274 Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
