I agree with Bryant's comment that we're closer to a 1.0 than perception indicates. If we cannot release a 1.0 from the incubator, this is something we're going to have to fight regularly.
> So why is it better than Jersey, Restlet or CXF? Now that we're closing out 0.1, let's use this question to help shape what we're doing in the next release (and beyond). Personally, I don't think it's healthy to get into a line-by-line comparison from within this community. I'll leave that to those doing their own evaluation and would rather our work stood for itself. We have said since the beginning that we wanted to focus on simplicity, ease of integration and a light footprint. Can we use those as themes to derive the next actions and create a project and community that is different enough from other options that we don't have to make it known via a list? -N ----- Original Message ---- From: Bryant Luk <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 1:43:49 PM Subject: Re: JAX-RS Stack comparison(s) I would suggest looking at: http://incubator.apache.org/wink/docs/Apache_Wink_User_Guide.pdf for the above and beyond JAX-RS features. The source code base is also of course Apache licensed compared to Jersey/Restlet. Compared to CXF, Wink is specifically focused on REST applications (which can be a good or bad thing depending on what you want). I don't know how extensible Jersey/Restlet are, but I think Wink is simple to extend and customize if need be. On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Davanum Srinivas<[email protected]> wrote: > Team, > > Here's some feedback on twitter....so WDYT? Why/How are we better than the > competition? > > @mraible - tried Apache Wink? - http://incubator.apache.org/wink/ > @dims Nope, but a 0.1 release in incubation doesn't seem like something I > should recommend to clients. ;-) > @mraible - i understand. but fyi, they did pass the JAX-RS TCK - > http://bit.ly/SjRTx > @dims So why is it better than Jersey, Restlet or CXF? > > thanks, > dims > -- - Bryant Luk
