[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-7638?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16356855#comment-16356855
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on CXF-7638:
-------------------------------------
sberyozkin commented on issue #379: [CXF-7638] Only register provider if it
implements specified contracts
URL: https://github.com/apache/cxf/pull/379#issuecomment-364092698
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
today.
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 intterfaces 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
Thanks
----------------------------------------------------------------
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:
[email protected]
> JAXRS CTS/TCK issue: register(...) should ignore components when invalid
> contracts are passed in
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CXF-7638
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-7638
> Project: CXF
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: JAX-RS
> Affects Versions: 3.2.2
> Reporter: Andy McCright
> Assignee: Andy McCright
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.2.3
>
>
> We're seeing some failures when running the JAX-RS 2.1 TCK - particularly
> around the register method. The javadoc states that the implementation MUST
> ignore the component if the call to register specifies a contract (interface)
> that the component does not implement.
> So, for example, suppose somebody calls code like this:
>
> public class MyProvider implements MessageBodyWriter<MyObject> ...
>
> Client c = ClientBuilder.newClient();
> c.register(MyProvider.class, ContainerRequestFilter.class); // should ignore
> c.register(new MyProvider, ExceptionMapper.class, MessageBodyReader.class);
> // should ignore
> Map<Class, int> contractPriorityMap = new HashMap<>();
> contractPriorityMap.put(ClientResponseFilter.class, 20);
> c.register(MyProvider.class, contractPriorityMap); // should ignore
> c.register(new MyProvider.class, contractPriorityMap); // should ignore
>
> The TCK tests basically check that nothing gets registered when a passed-in
> contract is not assignable to the provider class. And scenarios like the
> four mentioned above are failing.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
