Hi
One problematic aspect of the Aegis databinding is that hard to write an Aegis-bound code that will interoperate with non-Aegis
consumers or Aegis ones with slightly different understanding of how to interpret a payload. May be enhancing Aegis for it to
produce more predictable descriptions would be one way to preserve the transparency.
I guess there's a number of reasons why OSGI developers might prefer to do JAXWS & DOSGI. Those (CXF users) who would like to work
in OSGI and use JAXWS without DOSGI would have to
* provide for an explicit jaxws client and or endpoint setup, using either jaxws:endpoint/jaxws:client or doint it programmatically
in a BundleActivator
* These bundles will be more coarse-grained in a sense that an actual JAXWS endpoint implementation may not have an interface or
even if it will, this interface will unlikey to feature in OSGI consoles, that is you won't see with "> services" that a
jaxws:endpoint has been created
* The issue of publication/discovery is open
so if we go to DOSGI & JAXWS now then we have :
* implicit jaxws endpoint / client creation with the help of dosgi properties
* the interfaces are explicitly registered/looked up in BundleActivators which
makes them visible from a console
* service publication + discovery is there
I guess the same reasoning could be applied to DOSGI + JAXRS which is something
I'm hoping to do...
cheers, Sergey
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eoghan Glynn" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 10:54 AM
Subject: Re: Configuring DOSGI to use JAX-WS
Hi Josh,
I'm not entirely sold on the desirability of using JAX-WS with dOSGi.
Wouldn't this require that the original OSGi service class was
annotated with @WebService, @WebMethod etc?
And wouldn't this defeat the whole purpose of dOSGi in a sense? i.e.
if the remotability isn't enabled transparently on a largely unchanged
OSGi application, why not just write a straight JAX-WS server-side
application from the get-go?
Sorry if I'm slightly missing the point here. I just wanted to think
through the implications of using a databinding/frontend that's more
intrusive than Aegis/simple.
Cheers,
Eoghan
2009/5/11 Josh Holtzman <[email protected]>:
I just read David Bosschaert's blog entry [1] addressing questions about his
RFC 119 webinar. One of his answers sparked another question, and rather
than contact him directly, I decided to give the wider CXF community a crack
at it.
I'd like to have the option to specify which databinding strategy to use
with DOSGI. Currently, the Aegis databinding is "hard wired". I recognize
that this makes sense for most use cases, since it relieves the developer
from any wsdl or xsd responsibilities. But it doesn't make sense for
cross-platform use cases (which, interestingly, David mentions right after
the question "Why don't you use JaxWS?").
The default wsdls produced by the Aegis databinding are not easily usable
cross-platform. I wouldn't want to provide a developer with a wsdl that
specifies arg0, arg1, and arg2 as argument names, for example.
Is there interest in allowing the databinding strategy to be configurable in
the DOSGI reference implementation? If so, I'd be happy to work on a patch.
[1]
http://coderthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/05/questions-from-rfc-119-webinar.html
Thanks,
Josh
--
Josh Holtzman
Educational Technology Services, UC Berkeley
[email protected]
510.529.9225
