[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-5970?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14118198#comment-14118198
]
Romain Manni-Bucau commented on CXF-5970:
-----------------------------------------
sounds fair to me, also means scanning is a mess in most of cases (just drop
jackson and you don't know what you'll get: jaxb style or not provider) and
should never be used but spec implies it (IIRC that's a may or a should). Not
that happy with that but right CXF can't help.
Thanks for your time and review Sergey! We can close this task as will not fix
> review org.apache.cxf.jaxrs.provider.ProviderFactory.Message*ReaderComparator
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CXF-5970
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-5970
> Project: CXF
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Romain Manni-Bucau
> Assignee: Sergey Beryozkin
> Fix For: NeedMoreInfo
>
>
> Actually the task can be rephrase saying rework
> org.apache.cxf.jaxrs.provider.ProviderFactory#*Comparators
> Current implementations don't seem to have an absolute order which means
> sorting is not as deterministic as it should be under java >= 7.
> Other point is as a user you set a List of providers (you probably already
> sorted if important) so you want to ensure *your* order is respected at
> runtime (ie
> org.apache.cxf.jaxrs.provider.ProviderFactory#message[Readers|Writers]
> respect it).
> If you think this sorting is important maybe introducing in
> org.apache.cxf.jaxrs.AbstractJAXRSFactoryBean and
> org.apache.cxf.jaxrs.provider.ProviderFactory a boolean sortProviders can be
> enough to prevent calling sortXXX().
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
