sberyozkin commented on issue #379: [CXF-7638] Only register provider if it 
implements specified contracts
   OK, I've debugged the test and recall a bit better now what I was trying to 
do with these supported types. FYI, I found implementing all of these 
Configuration/Configurable very challenging, I recall typing and thinking I was 
not really sure if I was on the wrong or right path :-) as the original docs 
were quite compact, and the interpretation of some signatures can vary even 
   My own initial understanding was that it was primarily about supporting new 
filters/interceptors, given that in 2.0 (and in 2.1 for the most 
non-filter/non-interceptor interfaces) no priorities existed for MBR/MBW (and 
today for ex for ExceptionMapper or ParamConverterProvider) while many register 
methods accept the priorities or have the default priorities which have no any 
processing reqs for the last 2 interfaces and in 2.0 - for MBR/MBW as well.  
Hence those supported types lists (for client/server) only included the new 2.0 
filter/interceptors and only later I started adding the support for the wider 
set of standard types. 
   But  anyway, the patch looks fine, except that the supported contracts still 
need to be passed in, this is to protect Server-side Configuration from 
accepting ClientRequest/ResponseFilter and the client side Configuration - from 
ContainerRequest/ResponseFilter.   These supported types lists may need to be 
expanded for the client and server (to include all other standard types which 
make sense on the client and the server) such that a provider can not be 
registered under SomeNonJaxrsContract - which should be rejected

This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:

With regards,
Apache Git Services

Reply via email to