Re: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2100 - @Priority

I'm inclined to agree, but glad I proposed the PR. Its a shame that the org.apache.cxf.jaxrs.provider.ProviderFactory.MessageBodyReaderComparator and org.apache.cxf.jaxrs.provider.ProviderFactory.MessageBodyWriterComparator in CXF are private, otherwise we could most likely call those directly. I

Re: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2100 - @Priority

Hi Jon If we do it this way - jaxrs 2.1 - I d be to PR cxf instead of tomee. We fork too much code to stay sane here. What about just sorting by priority blindly? Cxf will handle the q and type sorting anyway, no? Le 26 juil. 2017 22:18, "Jonathan Gallimore" a écrit : > Hi, > > I've had a go a

Re: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2100 - @Priority

Hi, I've had a go at this: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/96 This creates a default comparator when no setting for cxf.jaxrs.provider-comparator is specified. This will order by priority first, but will still incorporate the default CXF sorting where priorities are the same for backwards co

Re: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2100 - @Priority

Yep - that's what I had in my mind. Makes sense if a comparator is specified, we should use that instead of the @Priority ordering. Jon On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > +1 > > What's do we want to do? Looks like a EE 8 feature we can eagerly support > as a default co

Re: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2100 - @Priority

+1 What's do we want to do? Looks like a EE 8 feature we can eagerly support as a default comparator (if the comparator is set we must bypass it to respect the comparator IMHO) Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2100 - @Priority

I'm happy to take a look at this one, unless someone else is already working on it? Jon