Hey Sergei and Josh
Is the DOSGi you are referring in the essay of an email below the
Masters thesis I read once (and it became an open source branch of an
apache project) or is this a separate design?
We worked on a design calked p2pSOA the connected distributed OSGi
containers over p2p technologies while exposing the endpt bundles as
web services. So I am fairly interested in your discussion - I just
want a quick clarification so I can position your work in my mind.
Thanks
On Aug 21, 2009, at 12:28 PM, "Sergey Beryozkin"
<sbery...@progress.com> wrote:
Hi Josh
Can you please let me know if JAXB is being used for your JAX-RS
endpoints ?
I've spotted that for HTTP Service based JAX-RS endpoints no
AegisProvider is being set - I'would actually like JAXB being used
by default for JAXRS endpoints which will be consistent with the
expectations of JAX-RS users in general - but I'd like to confirm
first that JAXB is working ok in your case...
thanks, Sergey
Sergey,
Thanks again for the detailed documentation you've provided in this
thread.
I was able to easily convert from JAX-WS to JAX-RS, which (I think)
will
make our lives even easier. Once we've got the ability to expose a
single
service with both of these frontends, I'll make use of that as well.
I agree that the jaxrs.resource property is no longer needed, as
you can
simply register jaxrs resources as a dosgi services.
Josh
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Sergey Beryozkin <sbery...@progress.com
>wrote:
Hi,
I've applied your patch and I've completed the initial integration
of
JAX-RS into DOSGi RI. As it often happens I underestimated a bit how
long it would take me to do it :-) but I'm quite happy now with
what has
been done so far.
I haven't got a chance to write JAX-WS system tests yet - I was a
bit
constrained in time but judging from the code you did JAXWS/
databindings
should be working nicely now - please feel free to add a system
test, or
either of us will do it asap.
Now, the property names have actually changed and differ from
those you
provided in the patch. As David noted, it was recommended that DOSGI
providers would use reverse domain names as prefixes to their custom
configuration types, such as 'pojo' in case of DOSGI RI.
Furthermore,
'pojo' was a bit constraining in that it did not reflect the fact
that
say SOAP or RS services were supported. Additionally, the DOSGI
way is
