Thanks, appreciate it!
On 2/28/2011 4:40 PM, Jeff Genender wrote:
Forgiven. Thanks for the apology.
Jeff
On Feb 28, 2011, at 2:26 PM, Glen Mazza wrote:
Agreed. The CXF PMC also held that Jeff's email simply didn't reach a level
warranting public airing, given the general view--in which I
Forgiven. Thanks for the apology.
Jeff
On Feb 28, 2011, at 2:26 PM, Glen Mazza wrote:
> Agreed. The CXF PMC also held that Jeff's email simply didn't reach a level
> warranting public airing, given the general view--in which I've grown more in
> agreement with--that *no* email warrants suc
Agreed. The CXF PMC also held that Jeff's email simply didn't reach a
level warranting public airing, given the general view--in which I've
grown more in agreement with--that *no* email warrants such airing. Any
types of questionable emails are best sent to the internal
priv...@cxf.apache.org
Alternatively, in CXF, users can just write a JAX-WS or JAX-RS endpoint and
have the runtime taking care of delivering AMQP messages and in case of
JAX-RS use the JMS properties for deciding how/where to route a given
message.
Seems to be a better option to me.
Cheers, Sergey
On Mon, Feb 28, 201
Hi
>
> FYI, I've tried very very hard to minimalize, lessen, remove the
> requirement or need for a specific client framework or stack other than HTTP
> to consume hornetq's REST interface. IMO, anybody writing a REST interface
> should make similar efforts. Because, otherwise, what's the point?
AMQP as the protocol rather than propietary JMS. I'd prefer JSON as
the format, but XML works too. The important thing on my part is that
in java/python/nodejs land I should't care whatsoever on the format
all I care about is that I called a method on a proxied interface in
java and "magically" got
you mean using AMQP as a marshalling format?
On 2/28/11 10:29 AM, James Carr wrote:
Even more important... REST over AMQP will be the superior choice in
the future imho. Small messages shared between java and non java
consumers. FTW! :)
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Bill Burke wrote:
On
Even more important... REST over AMQP will be the superior choice in
the future imho. Small messages shared between java and non java
consumers. FTW! :)
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Bill Burke wrote:
>
>
> On 2/28/11 6:10 AM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>>
>> Bill,
>>
>> I'm starting a new thread
On 2/28/11 6:10 AM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
Bill,
I'm starting a new thread...
Comments inline.
I think its fair to suggest to somebody asking about JMS integration
solutions other than CXF. We encourage such posts on resteasy mail list.
Especially since hornetq rest can be consumed b
With 14 +1 votes and no other votes, this vote passes. I'll get the artifacts
promoted.
Dan
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 3:30:56 PM 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
Hi robert,
Thanks for pointing that out, I just create a JIRA[1] to trace this issue.
[1]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-3368
On 2/25/11 4:26 AM, robert wrote:
Thanks... that namespace isn't on this page though:
http://cxf.apache.org/docs/schemas-and-namespaces.html.
-- Robert
On
Bill,
I'm starting a new thread...
Comments inline.
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Bill Burke wrote:
> 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
Hi Demetris
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 3:52 AM, Demetris wrote:
>
> Apologies for my late posting. I missed the later postings on this by a few
> of you.
> If it helps that's awesome otherwise you can just ignore it.
no problems, thanks for contributing to this thread
>
> On 2/27/2011 10:48 PM, De
13 matches
Mail list logo
