On Mon October 26 2009 8:20:23 am Benson Margulies wrote: > I started this, so now that I'm a committer I can finish it. > > However, I'd be grateful for some opinions. Does anyone object to hiding > the message about cxf.xml in conditions where it's not terribly relevant? > Can we decide to do this automatically?
Honestly, I think the message should be "reversed". Basically, if we don't find a cxf.xml on the classpath, just ignore and continue silently. If we DO find one, put an INFO message of "Using config from ....." > Can anyone shed any light on the > other message? Is it still an issue? At one point, we were seriously mixing up some @Resource annotations for the Bus using name="cxf" for some and name="bus" for others. Since we didn't have a bean named "bus", (the name is "cxf" in the config) they didn't resolve. A while ago, I went through and made them all name="cxf" where appropriate and removed many of them entirely if possible. Thus, that message might not even occur anymore. -- Daniel Kulp [email protected] http://www.dankulp.com/blog
