Hello Daniel, the WebReturn is a great suggestion, I'll get that setup, but I will also pursue your suggestion about the debug. Any particular class I should be looking towards for that, except the BareOutInterceptor?
Oh and a huge facepalm on my part about _return... :) On 13 December 2010 20:42, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: > On Monday 13 December 2010 6:07:32 am Yiannis Mavroukakis wrote: > > Any ideas on this? I'm really keen to move to 2.3.1, without forcing my > > users to regen their code. > > Honestly, I'm not really sure. Is there an @WebReturn on the methods with > a > "name" in it? That SHOULD be the easiest way from your side to make sure > it > stays consistent. > > While debugging, can you see if there are any @XmlElement annotations on > the > _return parameter? _return is correct (since you cannot have a name of > "return" as it's a reserved word), but there should be an @XmlElement > annotation on it. > > Dan > > > > > On 9 December 2010 14:29, Yiannis Mavroukakis < > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > I thought I may have found the issue, while debugging > BareOutInterceptor > > > but I'm still stumped.. > > > > > > My operation is called login, so in the MessageContentsList I end up > with > > > a > > > > > > com.gameaccount.external.account.jaxws_asm.LoginResponse class. > > > > > > this contains my own BaseResponse class under a _return variable, which > > > is what I am guessing gets written out...The thing > > > > > > that got me though is that this is exactly the same under 2.3.0, so > there > > > must be something a lot more subtle at work here.. > > > > > > > > > Y. > > > > > > On 9 December 2010 10:20, Yiannis Mavroukakis < > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > >> Here's a diff of 2.3.0 with 2.3.1 > > >> > > >> spazstik:account imavroukakis$ diff 2.3.0 2.3.1 > > >> 20c20 > > >> < [INFO] +- org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-frontend-jaxws:jar:2.3.0:compile > > >> --- > > >> > > >> > [INFO] +- org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-frontend-jaxws:jar:2.3.1:compile > > >> > > >> 23,24c23,24 > > >> < [INFO] | +- org.apache.cxf:cxf-api:jar:2.3.0:compile > > >> < [INFO] | | +- > org.apache.cxf:cxf-common-utilities:jar:2.3.0:compile > > >> --- > > >> > > >> > [INFO] | +- org.apache.cxf:cxf-api:jar:2.3.1:compile > > >> > [INFO] | | +- > org.apache.cxf:cxf-common-utilities:jar:2.3.1:compile > > >> > > >> 30,31c30,31 > > >> < [INFO] | | \- org.apache.cxf:cxf-common-schemas:jar:2.3.0:compile > > >> < [INFO] | +- org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-core:jar:2.3.0:compile > > >> --- > > >> > > >> > [INFO] | | \- org.apache.cxf:cxf-common-schemas:jar:2.3.1:compile > > >> > [INFO] | +- org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-core:jar:2.3.1:compile > > >> > > >> 34,40c34,40 > > >> < [INFO] | +- org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-bindings-soap:jar:2.3.0:compile > > >> < [INFO] | | +- org.apache.cxf:cxf-tools-common:jar:2.3.0:compile > > >> < [INFO] | | \- > > >> org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-databinding-jaxb:jar:2.3.0:compile < [INFO] | > +- > > >> org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-bindings-xml:jar:2.3.0:compile < [INFO] | +- > > >> org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-frontend-simple:jar:2.3.0:compile < [INFO] | \- > > >> org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-ws-addr:jar:2.3.0:compile > > >> < [INFO] +- org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-transports-http:jar:2.3.0:compile > > >> --- > > >> > > >> > [INFO] | +- org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-bindings-soap:jar:2.3.1:compile > > >> > [INFO] | | +- org.apache.cxf:cxf-tools-common:jar:2.3.1:compile > > >> > [INFO] | | \- > > >> > org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-databinding-jaxb:jar:2.3.1:compile [INFO] | > +- > > >> > org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-bindings-xml:jar:2.3.1:compile [INFO] | +- > > >> > org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-frontend-simple:jar:2.3.1:compile [INFO] | \- > > >> > org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-ws-addr:jar:2.3.1:compile > > >> > [INFO] +- org.apache.cxf:cxf-rt-transports-http:jar:2.3.1:compile > > >> > > >> 78,79c78,79 > > >> > > >> Nothing leaps out at me. I am using jaxb/ws 2.2.1 btw, I will try > with > > >> 2.2 just in case. > > >> > > >> Y > > >> > > >> On 8 December 2010 20:33, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> On Wednesday 08 December 2010 11:58:07 am Yiannis Mavroukakis wrote: > > >>> > Sorry, stupidly forgot to include more info about my setup. I am > > >>> > seeing this on the deployed service, I use a code first approach, > so > > >>> > it was simply a case of updating the version on my pom, recompiling > > >>> > and firing > > >>> > > >>> up > > >>> > > >>> > the service. If you need anything specific to debug this I'd be > happy > > >>> > > >>> to > > >>> > > >>> > help. > > >>> > > >>> I have NO idea what would cause this. Can you do something like: > > >>> > > >>> mvn clean dependency:copy-dependencies > > >>> or even just > > >>> mvn dependency:tree > > >>> > > >>> with each of the two and see if different versions of things are > > >>> popping up? > > >>> > > >>> This isn't in OSGi, is it? > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Dan > > >>> > > >>> > Thanks, > > >>> > > > >>> > Yiannis > > >>> > > > >>> > On 8 December 2010 16:53, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> > > On Wednesday 08 December 2010 11:45:15 am Yiannis Mavroukakis > wrote: > > >>> > > > Hello everyone, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > I updated from 2.3.0 to 2.3.1 today, and I noticed that the > > >>> > > >>> <return> > > >>> > > >>> > > > element has changed to <_return> any particular reason for > this? > > >>> > > > > >>> > > No idea really. Is there any way to create a small test case? > > >>> > > > > >>> > > The only thing that really was done around this is with the > > >>> > > wsdl2java tool and > > >>> > > java2ws tools (is that where you are seeing this), we did a > better > > >>> > > >>> job of > > >>> > > >>> > > endorsing the jaxws/jaxb 2.2 stuff. If this is just a runtime > > >>> > > >>> thing, > > >>> > > >>> > > then that really wouldn't apply though. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > -- > > >>> > > Daniel Kulp > > >>> > > [email protected] > > >>> > > http://dankulp.com/blog > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> Daniel Kulp > > >>> [email protected] > > >>> http://dankulp.com/blog > > -- > Daniel Kulp > [email protected] > http://dankulp.com/blog >
