[jboss-user] [Remoting] - Re: HTTPUnMarshaller and InvocationResponse objects

2009-08-03 Thread ron.si...@jboss.com
Hi Tom, Yeah, sorry for the confusion. I can't reconstruct what I was thinking, but I probably forgot about the fact, even though you mentioned it, that CoyoteInvoker is wrapping the result in an InvocationResponse. I think 1. the content-type returned by the ServerInvoctionHandler should be

[jboss-user] [Remoting] - Re: HTTPUnMarshaller and InvocationResponse objects

2009-08-03 Thread tfennelly
Yep.. that makes sense to me Ron :) View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4247654#4247654 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4247654 ___ jboss-user mailing list

[jboss-user] [Remoting] - Re: HTTPUnMarshaller and InvocationResponse objects

2009-08-02 Thread tfennelly
Hey Ron, sorry for not replying to this I got distracted after your email and forgot to come back to it then :) Anway... not sure I follow :) As I see it, the issue on the client side will not be with text/* mime types since it seems to me that the issue is that the text/* types are coming

[jboss-user] [Remoting] - Re: HTTPUnMarshaller and InvocationResponse objects

2009-07-09 Thread ron.si...@jboss.com
Hi Tom, HTTPMarshaller and HTTPUnMarshaller include special handling for strings in order to avoid serialization. The problem is that old test for string or not string, which worked prior to JBREM-653 allow user to set content-type for http responses is no longer appropriate. I'm thinking