Fwd: [offlist again and no, onlist is not fine!] Re: [onlist is fine!] Re: [offlist] Re: SOAP over JMS and CXF.

2011-02-25 Thread Glen Mazza
Jeff, I do not want you to send me any more emails off list, under any circumstances. If you have a problem with any email I send, send it directly to the dev list. If others agree with you, I'll go along with it, and apologize, as I did earlier today. If others disagree with you, OK, then m

[onlist is fine!] Re: [offlist] Re: SOAP over JMS and CXF.

2011-02-25 Thread Glen Mazza
You don't have to go off-list for this, Jeff. Besides my emails[1] aren't that bad, hardly trolling. There was no malice in what I had written (for I have a significant amount of respect for Bill), it was just meant as a playful kick back at Bill at 8:01am this morning at what I misperceived

Re: SOAP over JMS and CXF.

2011-02-25 Thread Glen Mazza
Yes, of course. Certainly, apologies to Bill for any (highly) false pretense I may have given that I'm a better developer than he. Glen On 2/25/2011 3:28 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote: Glen, Please lighten up. I really don't think these types of attacks are appropriate here. Thise seems more li

Re: SOAP over JMS and CXF.

2011-02-25 Thread Daniel Kulp
Glen, Please lighten up. I really don't think these types of attacks are appropriate here. Thise seems more like the Axis list response than a CXF list response, and that's not a good thing IMO. In general, if a user on a CXF list has a problem that is better met with a competing product,

Re: SOAP over JMS and CXF.

2011-02-25 Thread Glen Mazza
Well, I was hoping the glowing review I gave your book (http://www.jroller.com/gmazza/entry/book_review_restful_java_with) would result in additional sales and hence additional assistants for you to close the bugs I reported (if not early retirement for yourself :); if not, well, I appreciate you l

Re: SOAP over JMS and CXF.

2011-02-25 Thread Bill Burke
On 2/25/11 10:51 AM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote: In your opinion, why would such (Java) users prefer an HTTP centric interface for consuming messages backed up by JMS stores, when they just can do plain Java JMS ? What do you think ? (Remember you asked what I think so) I don't think people

Re: SOAP over JMS and CXF.

2011-02-25 Thread Sergey Beryozkin
Actually, Glen, looks like I've misread your comments as I always do, sorry :-). But of course I'd still encourage us all to discuss RestEasy issues on the RestEasy list where I'm a subscriber too :-) Cheers, Sergey 2011/2/25 Bill Burke : > Wow, you're funny.  CXF has 255 unresolved bugs, does th

Re: LogBrowser project is on the trunk

2011-02-25 Thread Sergey Beryozkin
Hi > > Few more comments. I agree, the way Tasks and Endpoints are currently > shown is nice. > > - Can you please consider having both ManageEndpoints and Filter links > located under the "Tasks" ? And have Endpoints shown first, with the > "Tasks" in the bottom of the pane ? Ultimately, the user

Re: SOAP over JMS and CXF.

2011-02-25 Thread Bill Burke
Wow, you're funny. CXF has 255 unresolved bugs, does this mean they are rotting at the core as well? FYI, half your bugs weren't even bugs. The others were minor example errors. I apologize your bug reports weren't given my immediate full attention, no matter how minor (or nonexistent) they wer

Re: SOAP over JMS and CXF.

2011-02-25 Thread Sergey Beryozkin
Nearly lost the message from Willem... >>> >>> On 2/24/11 8:23 PM, Willem Jiang wrote: CXF JMS transport supports JMS URI which is part of JMS over SOAP spec out of box. I think you can use it with JAXRS frontend without any trouble Yes indeed. On the server side it's easy. We can

Re: SOAP over JMS and CXF.

2011-02-25 Thread Sergey Beryozkin
Hi Guys Come on, this is not a RESTEasy or HornetQ mailing list. More comments inline 2011/2/25 Glen Mazza : > Bill, I'm all for plugging but if you could spend some time on fixing > the five (rather simple) RESTEasy bugs I reported (RESTEAST-494, 495, > 496, 497, and 502) over a month ago, among

Re: SOAP over JMS and CXF.

2011-02-25 Thread Glen Mazza
Bill, I'm all for plugging but if you could spend some time on fixing the five (rather simple) RESTEasy bugs I reported (RESTEAST-494, 495, 496, 497, and 502) over a month ago, among the 109 you presently have open and unresolved, that would also be good. As the Russian Czar learned during WWI, it'

Re: SOAP over JMS and CXF.

2011-02-25 Thread Bill Burke
That's great but what if your client isn't Java? Download a SOAP stack and pray its compatible with CXF? Simple HTTP calls are far superior, more lightweight, and easier to code. Seriously, check out what we've done with the HornetQ REST interface. Specifically the Javascript and Python example

Re: [VOTE] Apache CXF 2.3.3

2011-02-25 Thread Willem Jiang
+1, Willem On 2/24/11 4:30 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote: We've resolved over 50 issues since 2.3.2. Thus, we really should get 2.3.3 out, especially since 2.3.2 contained an issue preventing it from being used as a JAX-WS implementation for J2EE containers. List of issues: https://issues.apac

Re: LogBrowser project is on the trunk

2011-02-25 Thread Sergey Beryozkin
Hi Tomasz I've rerun the demo. First of all, the changes you've made recently have definitely made it look much better, thanks. Unfortunately, I'm still hitting this GWT ApplicationException when refreshing the endpoint : " Application Error Class$jcb 2011-02-25T11:46:55.078Z " Can this message,