Hi Willem,
thanks for you explanations.
I think the usage of the Spring*FactoryBeans is a good idea. It also
frees us from following every config change the cxf project does. Does
the style of calling a configure method on a factory come from CXF. I
know that this is the default style in CXF. If yes then we probably
can´t change it.
Btw. if we are so near to the cxf config style... Would it be possible
to use the original cxf syntax for spring configs? At the moment we have
a separate spring xml namespace for the cxf component. I think it would
be much easier for cxf users if they could simply use the client and
endpoint configs from cxf. I do not know if this is possible though.
Christian
Am 16.06.2011 16:16, schrieb Willem Jiang:
The main reason that we use the SpringJAXRSClientFactoryBean and
SpringJAXBServerFactoryBean is I want the users of camel-cxfrs
component can still leverage their knowledge of CXF JAXRS front end.
And there are some difference between the client and server
configuration, we need to treat them differently.
Because we need to support create the CxfRsClient and CxfRsServer with
URI or Spring configuration, we use CxfRsEndpoint and
CXFRsSpringEndpoint to support these two requirement.
--
Christian Schneider
http://www.liquid-reality.de
Open Source Architect
http://www.talend.com
