Well, folks can use Microbule without knowing anything about CXF. The only thing you write is pure 100% JAX-RS code! The internals of Microbule are somewhat CXF-focused at the moment. Obviously, I could provide other implementation-specific (Jersey, RestEasy, etc.) bindings, but for now I'm going to focus on CXF since that's what I tend to enjoy using :)
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 9:19 AM Sergey Beryozkin <sberyoz...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi James > > While I certainly support the idea of having a given framework offering > an option for the users to have a 100% portable code, which is a > foundation, I also think SpringBoot (I refer to it simply because it was > already referred on this thread already :-)) shows why it has become so > popular - the last thing they care about is being on some standard line > but what they care about is offer the features which will be important > for their users and their users are rewarding them back. > > I've been trying to follow the same path in CXF JAX-RS - offer a solid > foundation for people to do 100% portable code, but do try as hard as I > can add some extensions - slow at times I guess. I'm def not alone in > this approach if we refer to Jersey, RestEasy. I encourage you to do the > same with Microbule. Sorry if it sounds a bit controversial, hopefully > not too much :-) > > Cheers, Sergey > > > On 23/11/16 13:00, James Carman wrote: > > There have been certain providers in Microbule where I had to dig into > > CXF-specific areas in order to implement them (request timeouts that I > > wrote last night being one for sure). I'd like to keep it pure JAX-RS as > > much as possible, though. > > > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 6:21 AM Sergey Beryozkin <sberyoz...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> One thing which is worth noting that a portability of JAX-RS 2.0 > >> Features (and indeed other providers) is only achievable if they are > >> also implemented in a portable way... > >> > > > > > -- > Sergey Beryozkin > > Talend Community Coders > http://coders.talend.com/ >
