On May 30, 2008, at 9:56 AM, Abid Hussain wrote:
Hi everybody,
I just wanted to let you know about my experience in creating a ws-
client with cxf compared to axis2.
I have to say that client generation using Axis2 is really much
easier. Here are the reasons:
- In case you just want to call some remote operations (what usually
is enough for me) without any extra handlers and stuff you need NO
configuration files at all.
Umm.... you don't need any configuration with CXF either for 90% of
the use cases. I'm not sure what you were trying to configure.
Possibly the https stuff I guess.
- No extra configuration needed when calling a service via https.
With 2.1/2.0.6, you normally don't need that as well for most use
cases of https. If you need custom certs or specific algorithms or
something, sure.
- No wsdl-file needed after you generated the code using WSDL2Java.
You don't need to with CXF either. Just invoke a different
constructor on the generated Service object and specify the endpoint
URL you want to hit. In anycase, this is a JAX-WS specification thing.
- Only half as much of jars are needed.
A large number of the jars we ship aren't needed for basic client side
stuff. See the WHICH_JARS file for a description. Unlike Axis 2,
we include a lot more stuff "out of the box" preconfigured and ready
to run. If you don't need things like ws-security, Aegis, xmlbeans,
JAX-RS, etc..., you can pull them out.
It took me at least two days to get a client working using cxf -
using axis2 it took me about 2 hours.
For the most part, most people I've talked to have the opposite
experience.
Don't get me wrong: I'm not an Axis2 fan or something and I don't
want to offend anybody. I just want to share my experience and give
a hint that CXF is sometime really hard to handle, especially with
all the configuration, which can cost a lot of time when you're not
an expert in it.
Best regards
Abid
--
Abid Hussain
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: http://www.abid76.de
---
Daniel Kulp
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.dankulp.com/blog
