Then I think we are in agreement. All the code related to ws-addressing support in WS-Notification would have to be rewritten when getting rid of JBI. However, if you were talking about CXF interceptors, I'm not sure that's the right way to go, as implementing a web service purely using interceptors might be a bit more complicated than just using wsdl -> java and filling the gaps. That does not prevent the introduction of pluggability in any way though.
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 18:24, Jeff Genender <[email protected]> wrote: > Oh its not meant to be harsh... please don't take it personally... ;-) I am > well aware of its implementation since we dissected the heck out of it ;-) > You also seem to be aware of its issues too from your response below ;-) > > We tried to leverage it on a project that needed to make extensive use of > pub/sub along with pull points and it was extremely lacking in its delivery. > Hence we more or less rolled our own. > > Yes you are spot on with the WS-Addressing... that was a *big* area of > trouble we had and an area we also had to skirt to some degree. > > I really think the WS-Notification needs a much more pluggable approach to > the entire model (which is what we ended up writing to a degree). Its > somewhat hard to genericize the pub/sub implementation, especially when the > pull point is somewhat open season on what you can place in its return. I > think the interceptor pattern works real well and hence becomes a perfect > complement to the CXF architecture. Areas for interception are synchronous > vs asynchronous (i.e. pull point immediate return value vs. pub/sub), etc. > > Just my 3.14159 cents ;-) > > Jeff > > > On Jul 8, 2011, at 10:00 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > > > That's a bit harsh. It is functional and implements all the required > bits > > afaik. There are some missing stuff such as complex topics expressions > > though. > > > > Most of the problem come from WS-Addressing: it is heavily used in > > WS-Notification, but given the component was designed to work inside the > JBI > > bus, the behavior is not the one you would necessarily expect when using > > pure web services and where ws-addressing would target http services, not > > services in the JBI bus. Also, I agree the component has been > disfunctional > > in ServiceMix 4, but mostly due to the fact that the underllying > > ws-addressing related JBI piece of code had a behavior change between 3.x > > and 4.x. > > And fwiw, the ws-notification component completely rely on JMS for the > > implementation. > > > > Do you have more detailed problems / missing features ? > > > > On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 16:07, Jeff Genender <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> > >> On Jul 8, 2011, at 7:47 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > >> > >>> We're not talking about implementing something new here. We have an > >>> existing code base in ServiceMix that we may work on to remove the ties > >> onto > >>> JBI. We were just wondering if CXF would be a better place for it. I > >> have > >>> really no problems with keeping it in ServiceMix fwiw. > >>> > >> > >> Well... lets be honest... the SMX version is pretty much non-functional > and > >> it only implements a subset of WSN. I think it probably should be > >> re-written from scratch. > >> > >> Jeff > >> > >> > >>> Now if someone wants to start implementing a new WS-Eventing service, > >> that's > >>> completely unrelated to this issue. > >>> > >>> Also, we don't actually use it internally in ServiceMix, so ServiceMix > >> has > >>> no requirements, but our we have some users that do use it, that's all. > >>> > >>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 14:40, Alessio Soldano <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> I'm not sure of the exact requirements in ServiceMix, in any case I > >>>> suggest evaluating the WS-Eventing spec from WS-ResourceAccess > >>>> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/ra/ which is at CR level atm and is being > >>>> finalized *really* soon. > >>>> Cheers > >>>> Alessio > >>>> > >>>> On 07/08/2011 11:36 AM, Freeman Fang wrote: > >>>>> Hi Team, > >>>>> > >>>>> Recently we're discussing on Servicemix Dev mailling list about > >> redesign > >>>>> ws-notification component, previously it was designed as JBI > >>>>> ServiceEngine and need work together with BindingComponet(like > >>>>> servicemix-cxf-bc or servicmeix-http) over JBI bus, we currently want > >> to > >>>>> make it working without any JBI stuff and we believe this is more > >>>>> natural as ws-notification[2] actually is wsdl based and we think > move > >>>>> the ws-notification into CXF is more reasonable. > >>>>> > >>>>> Though no concrete idea now, my gut feeling is that we can leverage > our > >>>>> jms transport to do this. > >>>>> > >>>>> How about we support WS-Notification in CXF? Any feedback is > >> appreciated. > >>>>> > >>>>> [1] > >>>> > >> > http://servicemix.396122.n5.nabble.com/DiSCUSS-WS-Notification-td4563871.html > >>>>> > >>>>> [2]http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsn > >>>>> > >>>>> Best Regards > >>>>> Freeman > >>>>> --------------------------------------------- > >>>>> Freeman Fang > >>>>> > >>>>> FuseSource > >>>>> Email:[email protected] > >>>>> Web: fusesource.com > >>>>> Twitter: freemanfang > >>>>> Blog: http://freemanfang.blogspot.com > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Alessio Soldano > >>>> Web Service Lead, JBoss > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> ------------------------ > >>> Guillaume Nodet > >>> ------------------------ > >>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ > >>> ------------------------ > >>> Open Source SOA > >>> http://fusesource.com > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > ------------------------ > > Guillaume Nodet > > ------------------------ > > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ > > ------------------------ > > Open Source SOA > > http://fusesource.com > > -- ------------------------ Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ ------------------------ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
