Custom message body reader/writer, of course. Sorry, I wasn't thinking. Thanks, Josh
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 11:39 PM, Sergey Beryozkin < [email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Josh > > >> Have you looked into jackson.codehaus.org's JSON provider? > > > > > >Not yet. Should I? Is there a way to plug this into the DOSGi > >implementation (which I use -- possibly inappropriately -- only as a means > >to declarative publish my JAX-WS and JAX-RS endpoints)? > > If you decide to try a 3rd part (JAXRS) provider like Jackson then you'd > need to wrap it in a bundle and register an instance of it as > MessageBodyReader/MessageBodyWriter from the Activator and DOSGI JAXRS will > pick it up > > Alternatively, wrap it in your own provider (to be shipped with your > application bundle) and then just refer to your provider class using > org.apache.cxf.rs.provider property... > > cheers, Sergey > > > > > Josh Holtzman wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Benson Margulies > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > >> There have been some email threads on this list about sharing > >> configuration > >> and code between conventional web services and JAX-RS. At the same time, > >> we're having a bit of a debate over on the dev side. So I'm writing this > >> message to solicit some thoughts from users. > >> > >> > > I'm not sure whether this will help either side of the debate, but I > > thought > > I'd share my approach in case it's useful to you. I build my services > > with > > no JAX-WS or JAX-RS configuration or code at all. I then add separate > > JAX-WS and JAX-RS endpoints, which do not implement the service API, but > > implement something close to it. For instance "public void > > updateEntity(Entity entity)" works just fine for a java service and in > > JAX-WS, but in JAX-RS I want to return a Response object rather than > void. > > Asynchronous calls are also handled differently depending on the endpoint > > "style". > > > > The JAX-WS and -RS endpoints delegate all of their logic to the central > > pojo > > service, so the endpoints become purely about publishing the remote > > services > > in a way that makes the most sense for the client. This is a fundamental > > design decision that winds up requiring more code in the end, but it also > > allows separation of business logic from all of the latest-and-greatest > > endpoint technologies. > > > > > >> Do you use JSON, XML, or both? If you use JSON, are you happy with it? > >> > >> > > Both, but I'm just starting to play around with CXF's JSON support. I > > need > > pretty tight control over the JSON/P that my REST endpoints produce, so > > I'll > > likely wind up serializing entities myself in at least some cases. > > > > > >> Have you looked into jackson.codehaus.org's JSON provider? > >> > >> > > Not yet. Should I? Is there a way to plug this into the DOSGi > > implementation (which I use -- possibly inappropriately -- only as a > means > > to declarative publish my JAX-WS and JAX-RS endpoints)? > > > > > >> If you have an existing conventional service, and you are looking to add > >> (or > >> have added) JSON support, read on. > >> > >> How much investment do you have in data binding configuration? I'm > >> particularly interested in Aegis. Are any of you using Aegis with an > >> investment in .aegis.xml files or @nnotations? If so, what expectations > >> do > >> you have for JSON? > >> > > > > I use JAXB, not Aegis, for databinding because it's "the standard". > Sorry > > I > > can't be of any help here. > > > > Josh > > > > > >> > >> In 2.2.x, Aegis+JAX-RS+JSON only works for fairly simple data types. > >> Problems with namespaces and generic types cripple more complex cases. > >> These > >> problems would require a whole lot of effort to solve. I'm wondering, > >> really, if all of you could just plug in Jackson and get the results you > >> want. You might have to add some Jackson-specific @nnotations. If you > are > >> dependent on .aegis.xml files to avoid @nnotations, this would be a > >> problem. > >> If you have a giant raft of .aegis.xml files, or you have custom type > >> mappings, it might be a really big problem. In which case, I wonder, > >> ahem, > >> if you'd like to help me implement the changes to Aegis needed. > >> > >> Anyhow, please let us know. > >> > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Questions-for-JAX-RS-Users-tp25329919p25391530.html > Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
