Done, submitted https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-7543
On 2017-10-29 10:16, Andriy Redko <drr...@gmail.com> wrote: > One of the long standing ones :-), I think we should make both equally > supported. John, could you please create a JIRA for this issue? > > JDA> Hey guys > > JDA> Earlier today I was looking at an issue noted where proxies created for > CXF > JDA> weren't leveraging JAX-RS Features registered as providers. > > JDA> After digging into it further, I noticed that it was likely also true > that > JDA> they're not supported for WebClient. It seems like the key piece missing > JDA> is that all of the support is within ConfigurationImpl, but these two > JDA> stacks are using JAXRSClientFactoryBean as the underlying configuration. > > JDA> So I'm wondering, what makes more sense? Porting a Configuration object > to > JDA> be used within the proxy builder, or porting support for features > directly > JDA> into JAXRSClientFactoryBean. It does seem like there's a strong divide, > JDA> ConfigurationImpl classes are using JAX-RS Features, > JDA> but JAXRSClientFactoryBean classes are using the CXF native Features. > > JDA> John > >
