The CXF jira seems to be down. Any ideas how long this will be?
I am trying to get support for using the JMS MessageID as the JMS CorrelationID
as specified in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-2760 . After putting
some work/thought into this issue, I became aware that this feature is
available on the trunk but was not back-merged to the 2.1.x and 2.
: dev@cxf.apache.org
Subject: Re: Support for using JMS MessageID as CorrelationID
Hi Seumas,
Please see my comments in the mail.
Seumas Soltysik wrote:
> I am trying to get support for using the JMS MessageID as the JMS
> CorrelationID as specified in https://issues.apache.org/jira/brow
em.ji...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 10:24 PM
To: dev@cxf.apache.org
Subject: Re: Support for using JMS MessageID as CorrelationID
Hi Seumas,
Please see my comments in the mail.
Seumas Soltysik wrote:
> I am trying to get support for using the JMS MessageID as the JMS
> Corre
to
receive the response, and use a thread pool to run these receive task.
Willem
Seumas Soltysik wrote:
> Hi Willem,
> One more thing. With respect to using a workqueue I don't think it really
> solves the issue. The JMSListener essentially already uses its own workqueue
> t
@cxf.apache.org
Cc: Seumas Soltysik
Subject: Re: Support for using JMS MessageID as CorrelationID
Seumas,
The point is that in an async case, we do NOT want threads being consumed for
a receive if at all possible. At Progress, we had a particular customer that
would have several THOUSAND outstanding
should always be used as the CorrelationID except when the user specifies a
correlation ID and with async calls. This assumes that MessageIDs are truly
unique.
____
From: Seumas Soltysik [ssolt...@progress.com]
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 2:31 PM
To: Danie
If I call Enpoint.publish(address, implementation) and define a
like this:
http://ws.iona.com/peer_manager}PeerManagerPort";
address="http://localhost:/services/PeerManagerService";
wsdlLocation="./wsdl/peer-manager.wsdl"
createdFromAPI="true"
endpointName="ns:Pe
:56 pm Glen Mazza wrote:
> dkulp wrote:
> > On Wednesday 26 May 2010 4:18:25 am Seumas Soltysik wrote:
> >> If I call Enpoint.publish(address, implementation) and define a
> >>
> >> like this:
> >> >>
> >> name="{http://ws.iona.
What are the current WSDLPublish capabilities in CXF? Obviously WSDL can be
obtained by adding ?wsdl to a service URL, but I was wondering if it is
possible to configure CXF to have a separate port dedicated to serving WSDL
information. This is particularly useful when serving up WSDL for a secu
What is the anticipated release date for 2.3?
Is there any jira for the security advisory decribed here:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cxf/trunk/security/CVE-2010-2076.pdf
I am looking for the patch that was applied to fix this issue.
I have a branch of the 2.1.x line that does not contain the security fix and I
am looking to patch this
SoapTransportFactory extends AbstractTransportFactory which contains a
protected Bus data member. However, SoapTransportFactory has its own private
Bus data member and does not make use of the Bus data member inherited from
AbstractTransportFactory. Why is this? Is this done on purpose or is thi
I noticed in the CXF project pom, there are 2 different configurations from the
maven compiler plugin. One which targets the eclipse environment has a
source/target of 1.6 while the other uses a slightly different plugin version
and targets 1.5.
I would think that with the end of life of JDK1.5
manner.
Regards,
Seumas Soltysik
--
View this message in context:
http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/Response-SOAP-Headers-with-Provider-implementation-tp5485785p5490358.html
Sent from the cxf-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
As stated in previous posts, the presence of SOAP headers in WSDLs used in
conjunction with Provider implementations causes body parts to be processed
as header parts.
The key seems to be matching up the index of the part/parts which define the
outbound SOAP body with location of the SOAP body in t
21, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> On Sunday, February 19, 2012 10:05:01 PM Seumas Soltysik wrote:
> > As stated in previous posts, the presence of SOAP headers in WSDLs used
> in
> > conjunction with Provider implementations causes body parts to be
> processed
> &g
research on this issue and it appears that at some point
there was some work being done in this area:
http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/Async-HTTP-client-side-td2835428.html
Regards,
Seumas Soltysik
that for async calls, this is not null by default.
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> On Thursday, March 29, 2012 02:36:55 PM Seumas Soltysik wrote:
> > It would appear at this point that each async invocation involves a
> > listener thread, waiting for a
'll get that committed.
>
> What's interesting is that the Camel async stuff doesn't hit this and
> actually uses the workqueus. Not really sure what path it's taking to get
> there, but interesting none-the-less.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
> On Friday,
: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 2:11 AM
To: Seumas Soltysik
Cc: dev@cxf.apache.org; Daniel Kulp
Subject: Re: JMS 1.0.2 support..
Hi Seumas,
could you post the configuration you used?
Greetings
Christian
Seumas Soltysik schrieb:
> I have just upgraded to CXF 2.1.3 and am running against an
I have just upgraded to CXF 2.1.3 and am running against an old
implementation of SonicMQ version 5, which I believe based upon the old
1.0.2 apis. However, I am still getting a stack which indicates that CXF
does still not seem compatible with older versions of JMS. Clearly the
stack show that a J
22 matches
Mail list logo
