Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CXF 2.3.7 and 2.4.3.

2011-10-05 Thread Dennis Sosnoski
+1 - Dennis On 10/05/2011 07:09 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote: We've resolved over 94 issues since 2.4.2 and thus is time for a release and over 40 issues ported back for 2.3.7. List of issues: 2.4.3: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310511version=12317593 2.3.7

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CXF 2.3.7 and 2.4.3.

2011-10-05 Thread Alessio Soldano
+1 On 10/04/2011 08:09 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote: We've resolved over 94 issues since 2.4.2 and thus is time for a release and over 40 issues ported back for 2.3.7. List of issues: 2.4.3: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310511version=12317593 2.3.7

RE: [VOTE] Release Apache CXF 2.3.7 and 2.4.3.

2011-10-05 Thread Sean O'Callaghan
+1 -Original Message- From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:dk...@apache.org] Sent: 04 October 2011 19:09 To: dev@cxf.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache CXF 2.3.7 and 2.4.3. We've resolved over 94 issues since 2.4.2 and thus is time for a release and over 40 issues ported back for 2.3.7.

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

2011-10-05 Thread Guillaume Nodet
I've started to re-architect the WS-Notification implementation to get rid of JBI and be pure JAX-WS based. The results are available at https://github.com/gnodet/wsn . I think there was a consensus to move the code base to CXF, but I just want to make sure everyone agree. Also, I'd like to keep

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

2011-10-05 Thread Daniel Kulp
On Wednesday, October 05, 2011 5:22:01 PM Guillaume Nodet wrote: I've started to re-architect the WS-Notification implementation to get rid of JBI and be pure JAX-WS based. The results are available at https://github.com/gnodet/wsn . I think there was a consensus to move the code base to CXF,

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

2011-10-05 Thread Guillaume Nodet
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 18:01, Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org wrote: On Wednesday, October 05, 2011 5:22:01 PM Guillaume Nodet wrote: I've started to re-architect the WS-Notification implementation to get rid of JBI and be pure JAX-WS based. The results are available at

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

2011-10-05 Thread Daniel Kulp
Just wanted to mention that Guillaume and I have been chatting a bit about the code on the CXF IRC channel today. He ran into some differences with various JAX-WS implementations: http://irclogs.dankulp.com/logs/irclogger_log/cxf?date=2011-10-05,Wedsel=128#l124 that required some less clean

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

2011-10-05 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofré
Hi Dan (and Guillaume), I think it makes more sense to include WS-N in CXF. As the current implementation is tied to ActiveMQ, I think it would required some enhancement to: - use a pure JMS implementation, allowing us to use ActiveMQ and any other JMS broker (WebSphere MQ Series for

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

2011-10-05 Thread Guillaume Nodet
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 19:45, Jean-Baptiste Onofré j...@nanthrax.net wrote: Hi Dan (and Guillaume), I think it makes more sense to include WS-N in CXF. As the current implementation is tied to ActiveMQ, I think it would required some enhancement to: - use a pure JMS implementation, allowing

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

2011-10-05 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofré
Hi Guillaume, my comments inline: Yes, we discussed that, but a few features that are not provided by a pure JMS layer are needed (mostly the ability to know when consumers on a give topic subscribe / unsubscribe, and also composite destinations). I think it's a definitely a nice to have to be

Async http requests and workqueue....

2011-10-05 Thread Daniel Kulp
I have a question for folks to see what folks would think is the best option.Basically, if you use one of the JAX-WS async methods on a client when talking to an HTTP service, we have to put a runnable on the workqueue to handle the response. The question is, what should we do if the