On 01.12.2016 10:54, Carlos Sierra Andrés wrote:
Hi Christian,

Regarding the bus handling: in our original implementation we were not limiting the publication of endpoints to only one. So basically the administrator could establish several "endpoint publication contexts (?)" to potentially publishing different applications with different management on each. Maybe this no longer makes sense in the context of this new impl. It it true that, if we keep the ability to have more than one endpoint, we would need to mark the buses somehow so only the interesting ones are tracked. This Buses could be created, for instance, after configuration admin factories. Anyhow, as I said before, this might no longer make sense in the context of this RI.
I propose we make this simpler for now and only introduce the tracking of Bus as a service if there is a concrete need for it. WDYT?

I am also making use of the Servlet Whiteboard, which is why I publish the Servlet, and might not be desirable either.
The servlet whiteboard is fine. The only downside is that it makes the code a bit incompatible with old HttpService impls. In CXF we switched to using the HttpService directly for the servlet transport but I think for this new impl it should be fine to rely on the whiteboard spec.


Christian Schneider

Open Source Architect

Reply via email to