Converted it to a PR -> https://github.com/apache/cxf/pull/561 For now i'm waiting for some CI feedback but basic mecanism is functional :).
Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 19:50, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> a écrit : > Here is a draft - I didn't rerun the build but wanted to share the idea: > https://github.com/rmannibucau/cxf/commit/53c3c7016ce72dab61035a5417a7bba448fc3e43. > The pattern is the same for all: add a nested Portable feature which is > preferred for jaxrs over jaxws. > > Do you think we can get a fix for the original soon - this one or another? > On my side I'd love to drop jaxws dead dependency ASAP in my apps which > are using logging feature and gzip feature. > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> > > > Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 18:38, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> a > écrit : > >> Created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8053 to try to >> summarize it, feel free to comment/adjust the description if I miss >> anything. >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github >> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn >> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book >> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> >> >> >> Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 18:17, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> a écrit : >> >>> >>> >>> > On May 31, 2019, at 11:09 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hmm, wouldn't a jaxws factory be a good replacement. So plan would be >>> >>> I’d prefer not as then you’d have a different programming model for >>> jax-ws built in features (MTOMFeature, AddressingFeature) and CXF provided >>> features. And of course there is the “it would break everyone’s existing >>> code” issue. >>> >>> Having the JAX-WS versions wrapper/delegate to the native versions would >>> be fine and should be mostly seamless. For the most part, there aren’t >>> any protected fields or anything that subclasses would be using so it >>> should work. >>> >>> Dan >>> >>> >>> >>> > 1. deprecate current impl >>> > 2. replace them by CxfFeature native implementations (+ delegation for >>> 1) >>> > 3. provide a WSFeature.convert(cxfFeature) factory, also cxf can surely >>> > wrap them automatically in its impl. >>> > >>> > wdyt? >>> > >>> > Romain Manni-Bucau >>> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau < >>> https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>> | Blog >>> > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/ <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/>> >>> | Old Blog >>> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>> >>> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau <https://github.com/rmannibucau>> >>> | >>> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau < >>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau>> | Book >>> > < >>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance >>> < >>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 17:00, Daniel Kulp <[email protected] <mailto: >>> [email protected]>> a écrit : >>> > >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> On May 31, 2019, at 10:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau < >>> [email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Was not thinking to drop it from the parent but more to get soap free >>> >>> flavors of cxf features which would then be usable in jaxrs apps >>> without >>> >>> any issue. >>> >>> In other words we would get a cxf.AbstractCxfFeature used as base >>> for all >>> >>> impl and current existing ones would be deprecated and would >>> delegate to >>> >>> the new ones. No backward compat issue I think. >>> >> >>> >> We cannot deprecate them as they would still be required for JAX-WS >>> >> users. We then have extra naming issues which can be confusing. >>> >> “LoggingFeature” is the jax-ws one, what is the non-jax-ws one called? >>> >> Maybe prefix them all with CXF like “CXFLoggingFeature”. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> -- >>> >> Daniel Kulp >>> >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> - http://dankulp.com/blog < >>> http://dankulp.com/blog> < >>> >> http://dankulp.com/blog <http://dankulp.com/blog>> >>> >> Talend Community Coder - http://talend.com <http://talend.com/> < >>> http://coders.talend.com/ <http://coders.talend.com/>> >>> >>> -- >>> Daniel Kulp >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> - http://dankulp.com/blog < >>> http://dankulp.com/blog> >>> Talend Community Coder - http://talend.com <http://coders.talend.com/> >>> >>
