Eoghan,

On Thursday 11 September 2008 5:52:20 am Eoghan Glynn wrote:
> > Next question.
> > When I expose a service registered under multiple interfaces, what is it
> > supposed to do in today's codebase?
> > Will it somehow expose both interfaces over the wire or does it just
> > pick one?
>
> The intention was to support the multi-interface case mapping to a
> single endpoint by creating a java.lang.reflect.Proxy aggregating the
> interfaces, and using this proxy as the service class on the
> ServerBeanFactory.
>
> However this introduces some complications around the namespace mapping
> used the Aegis binding, particularly in ensuring that the namespace used
> for client-originated payloads match that expected by the server-side.
>
> So this approach will require some core CXF changes in order to work,
> and isn't supported right now.

Actually, you shouldn't need to refactor any core CXF for this I think.  If 
you write your own ServiceConfiguration object, there are methods for getting 
the qnames for the request/response wrappers and such where you can make sure 
you get the correct namespaces from the correct implementation.   Just 
register your version before the default versions.

Dan



>
> For the moment, maybe we should just take the simple approach of mapping
> each interface onto a /separate/ endpoint.
>
> /Eoghan
>
> > I'm looking at changing the behaviour of the org.osgi.remote.publish
> > property with the behaviour in the spec (instead of the value
> > 'false|true' a list of interfaces or '*' for all published interfaces
> > should be provided).
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > David
> >
> > ----------------------------
> > IONA Technologies PLC (registered in Ireland)
> > Registered Number: 171387
> > Registered Address: The IONA Building, Shelbourne Road, Dublin 4, Ireland
>
> ----------------------------
> IONA Technologies PLC (registered in Ireland)
> Registered Number: 171387
> Registered Address: The IONA Building, Shelbourne Road, Dublin 4, Ireland



-- 
Daniel Kulp
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.dankulp.com/blog

Reply via email to