On Monday 27 September 2010 9:44:25 pm Benson Margulies wrote: > It looks like our close and personal relationship with Spring > continues to really inconvenience very few and serve the majority. I > wonder if we would want to invest energy in merely designing some > scheme to make Spring more removable to assist some volunteer in > working on it?
Well, this is something I keep thinking about quite a lot latetly. There are several areas where we use Spring and expose spring to the user: 1) Wiring our own bus together 2) Providing configuration and namespace handlers and such for the user to more easily use CXF with spring 3) Using/abusing the spring aop stuff for things like transactions and sessions scopes and such 4) JMS transport I really don't want to touch on #4. Even the JMS guys say Spring JMS is the way to go to get JMS done correctly. For #3, we do provide some factories for some of the scopes and such, but again, spring does much of that so much better. Everything done for #2 there are good API's (that the spring things call) and thus can be done programatically. If someone has a different config mechanism, it's not hard to create a new one. That really leaves #1. We DO provide a non-spring version of the bus (The ExtensionBus stuff), but it has a bunch of limitations in what it can pick up and wire together and such. Much of the SecPolicy stuff won't work for example. This is something I was THINKING about looking at more for 2.4, partially to make things much more OSGi friendly where the various modules can be relatively independent bundles that an "OSGIBus" could grab via tha OSGi registries and such. Yea. Brain is noodling, but hasn't gotten very far yet. -- Daniel Kulp [email protected] http://dankulp.com/blog
