Cxf is known (by us and moreover by users) and integration is done so i think i prefer cxf.
Cxf size is not an issue just the fact we have to manage two dependency trees is se split jaxrs and jaxws would be a pain. If we use sthg else that's close. Finally wink is based on cxf... - Romain Le 5 mai 2012 01:40, "Aldrin Leal" <[email protected]> a écrit : > http://incubator.apache.org/wink/ > > -- > -- Aldrin Leal, <[email protected]> / http://meadiciona.com/aldrinleal > > > On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > Wink? > > > > - Romain > > > > > > 2012/5/5 Aldrin Leal <[email protected]> > > > > > JAX-RS could be done with Wink as well. Does it sound like a fit? > > > > > > -- > > > -- Aldrin Leal, <[email protected]> / > http://meadiciona.com/aldrinleal > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 4:36 PM, David Blevins <[email protected] > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > JAX-RS is being added to the Java EE 7 Web Profile. Given that and > the > > > > fact that many of the recent user questions are about JAX-RS, perhaps > > we > > > > should consider adding it to our Web Profile distro now rather than > > > later. > > > > > > > > The big question in my mind is, how small can we get it? Can we do > it > > > > with CXF in a way that doesn't bring in JAX-WS? > > > > > > > > If we pull in JAX-WS too, then we have to certify it and that is a > > major > > > > effort. > > > > > > > > > > > > -David > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
