Hi, we have an IONA reference in one of our namespaces:
http://cxf.apache.org/apidocs/constant-values.html#org.apache.cxf.tools.corba.common.ReferenceConstants.REFERENCE_NAMESPACE
Can/should we switch that to something CXF specific?
Thanks,
Glen
--
Glen Mazza
Software Engineer, Talend (http://
On Wednesday 02 February 2011 9:03:07 am Glen Mazza wrote:
> Hi, we have an IONA reference in one of our namespaces:
>
> http://cxf.apache.org/apidocs/constant-values.html#org.apache.cxf.tools.cor
> ba.common.ReferenceConstants.REFERENCE_NAMESPACE
>
> Can/should we switch that to something CXF sp
Just to let everyone know, Olivier Lamy has worked with the Sonar folks to
setup a Sonar instance at Apache:
http://sonar.apache.org
CXF got the pleasure of being one of the test projects. :-)
We just configured in the CXF PMD and Checkstyle rules so the next build will
have those.
--
Hi,
I am running into an issue -Caused By:
com.sun.xml.bind.v2.runtime.IllegalAnnotationsException:.
I know it because of Jaxb custom binding. But I am unable to find the proper
documentation/solution
Here is the scenario I am doing
@WebService
public interface AuthService {
@XmlJav
public class MedEntryType {
@XmlAttribute//-- REMOVE THIS
public String key;
@XmlValue//-- REMOVE THIS
public MedId value;
// then it will work
}
--
View this message in context:
http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/Custom-JxBBindings-for-CXF-tp3368602p3368
Do we need to have these dueling claims for who employs how many
committers / PMC members? Could we persuade both Talend and FUSE to
just say 'committers, get your red hot committers!'
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:23 PM, wrote:
> Commercial CXF Offerings
>
> Page added by Daniel Kulp
>
> Commercial
+1... lets remove the "leading committers" comments... that really sucks and
is elitist at best :-(
Jeff
On Feb 2, 2011, at 6:27 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> Do we need to have these dueling claims for who employs how many
> committers / PMC members? Could we persuade both Talend and FUSE to
If FUSE would change 'most' to 'many', and Talend would at least trade
in 'leading' on the same thing ...
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Jeff Genender wrote:
> +1... lets remove the "leading committers" comments... that really sucks and
> is elitist at best :-(
>
> Jeff
>
> On Feb 2, 2011, at
Someone is paying attention... cool. :-)
On Wednesday 02 February 2011 8:27:38 pm Benson Margulies wrote:
> Do we need to have these dueling claims for who employs how many
> committers / PMC members? Could we persuade both Talend and FUSE to
> just say 'committers, get your red hot committers!'
Unless it is blatant lies (i.e., non-reputable companies), I say let the
companies do a little bit of advertising on the Support page, even if
they contradict each other or embellish a bit. We want users to choose
support, because it results in more hired people working on the
projects. Let t
-1... what is reputable? Who decides who is "reputable"? Am I reputable?
Apache is not about tooting your own horn. Go back to your respective company
and have them purchase press releases and advertise on their sites. Apache is
not a locale for horn tooting.
Jeff
On Feb 2, 2011, at 7:23 P
OK, fine, providing they can link to such horn tooting pages from the
support site. Open source supporting companies hire marketing reps and
I have no problem with them enticing users into getting commercial
support. It's good for the community. CXF cannot survive on arrogant
inactive commit
12 matches
Mail list logo
