Yes, most certainly, but it does not incorporate the library
architecturally within it.  That was the point I was trying to make.

Glen

Am Mittwoch, den 15.08.2007, 10:37 -0400 schrieb Randy Burgess:
> Metro has Spring support.
> 
> https://jax-ws-commons.dev.java.net/spring/
> 
> Regards,
> Randy Burgess
> Web Applications Developer
> Nuvox Communications
> 
> 
> 
> > From: Glen Mazza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Reply-To: <[email protected]>
> > Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:26:28 -0400
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[email protected]>
> > Subject: Re: java2wsdl -> wsdl2java lossy? (newbie alert!)
> > 
> > Hello Brett,
> > 
> > Am Donnerstag, den 09.08.2007, 23:37 -0500 schrieb Brett Wooldridge:
> > 
> >> I may return to CXF at some point, the level of activity here is 
> >> encouraging
> >> and leads me to think CXF will improve over time.  However -- and really, I
> >> don't mean to knock you guys on your own list but I've kicked the tires of
> >> just about every WS framework out there so I'm just rendering my opinion --
> >> for _my tastes_ CXF is too "heavy".  I'm not particularly a fan of the
> >> Spring baggage.  I like Spring, but I prefer it in my application if I use
> >> it, not in my framework dependencies.
> >> 
> > 
> > You're mentioning a major differentiator between the JAX-WS RI and
> > CXF--one incorporates Spring by default, while the other doesn't.  Some
> > will prefer one architecture over the other for that very reason.
> > 
> > (It is kind of like the difference between the GPL open source license,
> > where the emphasis is on making sure that all software incorporating a
> > GPL product remains *free*, vs. the Apache license, where the emphasis
> > is on making sure the software gets *used*, free or not free, to the
> > greatest extent possible.  No right or wrong answer, but just a
> > preference depending on the particular creator of the software.)
> > 
> > *Not* incorporating Spring has its own drawbacks, as mentioned on the
> > JAX-WS RI mailing list yesterday[1]--namely, you sometimes need to
> > reinvent the wheel and learn product-specific configuration methods that
> > aren't transferable (like Spring knowledge) to other fields.
> > 
> > Keep in mind, CXF is just the bottom part of a whole suite of
> > products--Apache Camel, ServiceMix, ActiveMQ, perhaps I can include
> > Tuscany and Apache ODE as well.  The Apache CXF team seems to have
> > accepted that for most users, sooner or later, Spring is going to show
> > up in your application, so it might as well take advantage of it early
> > to the greatest extent possible.  And if a user doesn't really want
> > Spring, Sun offers an fine implementation without it.
> > 
> > [1]
> > https://metro.dev.java.net/servlets/ReadMsg?listName=users&msgNo=1416
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Glen
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> This email and any attachments ("Message") may contain legally privileged 
> and/or confidential information.  If you are not the addressee, or if this 
> Message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, 
> copy, or distribute it, and we ask that you please delete it (including all 
> copies) and notify the sender by return email.  Delivery of this Message to 
> any person other than the intended recipient(s) shall not be deemed a waiver 
> of confidentiality and/or a privilege.

Reply via email to