Comments on: Resteasy Project: JAX-RS Restful Web Services implementation http://bill.burkecentral.com/2008/02/25/resteasy-project-jax-rs-restful-web-services-implementation/ tech talk radio Sat, 19 Jul 2008 13:38:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=MU By: Serge Pagop http://bill.burkecentral.com/2008/02/25/resteasy-project-jax-rs-restful-web-services-implementation/#comment-1809 Serge Pagop Tue, 26 Feb 2008 21:05:24 +0000 http://billburke.wordpress.com/?p=98#comment-1809 Great news Bill, I will try that. Great news Bill, I will try that.

]]> By: Dan Diephouse http://bill.burkecentral.com/2008/02/25/resteasy-project-jax-rs-restful-web-services-implementation/#comment-1805 Dan Diephouse Tue, 26 Feb 2008 00:35:21 +0000 http://billburke.wordpress.com/?p=98#comment-1805 I'll add that Jersey already has a bunch of different connectors: Grizzly, a small embedded HTTP Server, Servlets, JAX-WS and one I wrote for Mule. Its pretty damn easy to integrate and its been proven to integrate well on a bunch of different platforms. I’ll add that Jersey already has a bunch of different connectors: Grizzly, a small embedded HTTP Server, Servlets, JAX-WS and one I wrote for Mule. Its pretty damn easy to integrate and its been proven to integrate well on a bunch of different platforms.

]]> By: DamnHandy : » Announcing JBoss RESTEasy Beta1 http://bill.burkecentral.com/2008/02/25/resteasy-project-jax-rs-restful-web-services-implementation/#comment-1803 DamnHandy : » Announcing JBoss RESTEasy Beta1 Mon, 25 Feb 2008 23:07:53 +0000 http://billburke.wordpress.com/?p=98#comment-1803 [...] case you didn’t see Bill’s post on the subject, I wanted to let folks know that RESTEasy entered it’s first beta release as JBoss RESTEasy [...] [...] case you didn’t see Bill’s post on the subject, I wanted to let folks know that RESTEasy entered it’s first beta release as JBoss RESTEasy [...]

]]> By: Ryan J. McDonough http://bill.burkecentral.com/2008/02/25/resteasy-project-jax-rs-restful-web-services-implementation/#comment-1802 Ryan J. McDonough Mon, 25 Feb 2008 22:32:43 +0000 http://billburke.wordpress.com/?p=98#comment-1802 Just FYI, the name should be written as RESTEasy as opposed to Resteasy or RESTeasy ;) Thanks for finishing off the coding effort too :) Ryan- Just FYI, the name should be written as RESTEasy as opposed to Resteasy or RESTeasy ;) Thanks for finishing off the coding effort too :)

Ryan-

]]> By: alesj http://bill.burkecentral.com/2008/02/25/resteasy-project-jax-rs-restful-web-services-implementation/#comment-1801 alesj Mon, 25 Feb 2008 22:18:21 +0000 http://billburke.wordpress.com/?p=98#comment-1801 Or better, how can we use MC and ditch Spring. :-) Or better, how can we use MC and ditch Spring. :-)

]]> By: alesj http://bill.burkecentral.com/2008/02/25/resteasy-project-jax-rs-restful-web-services-implementation/#comment-1800 alesj Mon, 25 Feb 2008 22:16:33 +0000 http://billburke.wordpress.com/?p=98#comment-1800 Tell us more about the Spring integration. ;-) Tell us more about the Spring integration. ;-)

]]> By: billburke http://bill.burkecentral.com/2008/02/25/resteasy-project-jax-rs-restful-web-services-implementation/#comment-1799 billburke Mon, 25 Feb 2008 21:49:21 +0000 http://billburke.wordpress.com/?p=98#comment-1799 @Dan: Why over Jersey? 1) The specification is simple enough to implement. I want our own so that we can innovate on our own without having to get permission from jersey or the specification. There's already one feature (pojo mappings) that I want to try out and the spec lead does not want in the specification. 2) I don't want to be constrained by any part of the jersey architecture when I integrate it with JBoss and our EJB container. 3) I've already "innovated" (if you can call it an innovation) on the client framework. AFAIK, the jersey does not have this feature 4) If Apache CXF can implement JAX-RS why can't JBoss? 5) I could give two shits about Apache CXF ;-) I can leverage JBoss's common deployment and config when I create tighter integration. 6) I have borrowed and will borrow extensively from the Jersey testsuite. This is, IMO, where the real value of Jersey is. The specification is incredibly easy to implement on its own. @Dan:

Why over Jersey?

1) The specification is simple enough to implement. I want our own so that we can innovate on our own without having to get permission from jersey or the specification. There’s already one feature (pojo mappings) that I want to try out and the spec lead does not want in the specification.

2) I don’t want to be constrained by any part of the jersey architecture when I integrate it with JBoss and our EJB container.

3) I’ve already “innovated” (if you can call it an innovation) on the client framework. AFAIK, the jersey does not have this feature

4) If Apache CXF can implement JAX-RS why can’t JBoss?

5) I could give two shits about Apache CXF ;-) I can leverage JBoss’s common deployment and config when I create tighter integration.

6) I have borrowed and will borrow extensively from the Jersey testsuite. This is, IMO, where the real value of Jersey is. The specification is incredibly easy to implement on its own.

]]> By: Dan Diephouse http://bill.burkecentral.com/2008/02/25/resteasy-project-jax-rs-restful-web-services-implementation/#comment-1798 Dan Diephouse Mon, 25 Feb 2008 21:07:01 +0000 http://billburke.wordpress.com/?p=98#comment-1798 So I'll bite: why would I ever use this over Jersey? I believe Jersey has all those things you list as well. Apache CXF also has an implementation in progress. Once again I'm not sure of the value, but at least there you can make the case that because its unified with the JAX-WS implementation you can leverage some benefits (common deployment, common config, etc). Personally I would've rather seen CXF embed the RI though. So I’ll bite: why would I ever use this over Jersey? I believe Jersey has all those things you list as well.

Apache CXF also has an implementation in progress. Once again I’m not sure of the value, but at least there you can make the case that because its unified with the JAX-WS implementation you can leverage some benefits (common deployment, common config, etc). Personally I would’ve rather seen CXF embed the RI though.

]]> By: alrubinger http://bill.burkecentral.com/2008/02/25/resteasy-project-jax-rs-restful-web-services-implementation/#comment-1797 alrubinger Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:52:43 +0000 http://billburke.wordpress.com/?p=98#comment-1797 Congratulations on the milestone. :) S, ALR Congratulations on the milestone. :)

S,
ALR

]]> By: blpsilva http://bill.burkecentral.com/2008/02/25/resteasy-project-jax-rs-restful-web-services-implementation/#comment-1796 blpsilva Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:24:11 +0000 http://billburke.wordpress.com/?p=98#comment-1796 Hi Bill, i didn't know you guys at JBoss were developing an implementation of this JSR. This is really great news. I took a look on the Jersey project and found it very interesting. It'll be nice to see this implementation of yours, given that I'm a longtime JBoss user. Hi Bill, i didn’t know you guys at JBoss were developing an implementation of this JSR.
This is really great news. I took a look on the Jersey project and found it very interesting. It’ll be nice to see this implementation of yours, given that I’m a longtime JBoss user.

]]>