Please ignore the first message, it got sent too early. > Le mercredi 4 janvier 2012 à 20:31, Sergey Beryozkin a écrit : > > Hi > > On 02/01/12 15:18, Brice Dutheil wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Thanx for your replies. Sorry for the belated reply, you know christmas / > > > nuyear holidays... So happy new year to all. > > > > > > Anyway many interesting reads. > > > > > > > > > Yeah managing WSDL versioning through XSD was one of the heavyweight > > > solution I had in mind, but I'm not sure many people have the right tools > > > in hand to make versioned WSDL. I'm not an expert but in the approach > > > you mentioned, it leads to one WSDL document, correct ? Then how can we > > > address those mappings on the Java side. > > > > > > CXF can handle this via the Transformation feature that Sergey just > > > mentioned. The wiki is not really clear on how to redirect things given a > > > certain differentiator. > > > > > > > http://cxf.apache.org/docs/servlet-transport.html > > > > explains how CXFServlet redirection can be set up. more info is here > > http://sberyozkin.blogspot.com/2011/11/cxf-tranform-feature-and-redirection.html > > > > > > > > >
Ok I better understand how it works. > > > Also it might be possible to use this transformation feature on the target > > > endpoint to match the Java API. However it does seem to work only on the > > > XML not on other content such as JSON which is common which JAX-RS > > > services. > > > > > > > Works when a default Jettison-based provider is used too > > > > > > > > > Could it work with other providers (Jackson especially, but Gson too). > > > In all the things I read here and there, it seems all the techniques about > > > versioning avoids to handle this on the Java side be it possible, limited, > > > or experimental at best. > > > > > > For example, what would you do if you need to expose two different > > > versions, with difference in object/property names, in some value (ex: > > > splitting old value to indicate different sub-cases), etc. > > > In a previous mission we were using EJB-JARs and WARs, this way we could > > > use different objects with the same qualified name (due to the JEE > > > classloader architecture), services were exposed with a version number in > > > the URI (.../ws/5_0/quote) and in the JNDI name (.../ejb/5_0/quote), and > > > of > > > course one WSDL per services (no versioning on this front). While clean, > > > this approach is also pretty heavyweight to maintain and is limited to > > > people that use JEE and EJB-JARs or people that can work in multi > > > classloader environment. > > > > > > The annotation approach seems more code centric and probably easier for > > > people that don't follow the contract first approach. But you need to deal > > > with annotating your code then. > > > But if you share your API artefact with your partners (or your colleagues) > > > so they don't have to generate code from the WSDL or from the WADL, you > > > will expose fields object that belong to the upper version or the lower > > > version. > > > > > > > Sorry, I'm not sure I understand. I think that as far as the web > > services are concerned, the versioning & extensibility is to do with > > updating the way the consumers of the service use this service at the > > moment, so the way the implementation code is managed is kind of > > orthogonal to it... > > > > > > > > > Yeah, I'm not limiting the discussion of versionning to pure a pure endpoint / serialzed data discussion. IMHO, the way implementation is made is also part of it this discussion in the sense of what would be the best practices, is there any emerging /patterns/ regarding versionning on the implementation's side. Basically those are the two options that are right now in my head about implementing verisonning …in the java code part. In JEE you could craft the following architecture : [EJB-JAR v2] -> [EJB-JAR core] [EJB-JAR v3] ---------^ You see in this model that having multiple EJB-JAR allows isolation and modularity, the versionned EJB-JARs act as facades with adapters. JEE would then allow to expose EJBs as web services or resources. While in a WAR only application, you have one class loader, no isolation so you could make it explicit in the qualified names and / or you can make use of annotations to help versionning support in your model And whatever the case you will probably need to make the link between the implementation and the contracts such as the WSDL or the WADL. So this why I'm going further than only about how a client consumes the service or the resource. Am I clearer ? Anyway thanks for the informations :) -- Brice > > Cheers, Sergey > > > > > > > > > > > Do the JAX-WS / JAX-RS are good candidates to address or at least provide > > > support for contract versioning ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > -- > > Sergey Beryozkin > > > > Talend Community Coders > > http://coders.talend.com/ > > > > Blog: http://sberyozkin.blogspot.com >
