Same GAE issues here.
Guilherme Silveira
Caelum | Ensino e Inovação
http://www.caelum.com.br/
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 9:31 PM, Bill Burke <bburke_at_redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 4/7/11 3:21 PM, Bill Burke wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 4/7/11 3:10 PM, Markus KARG wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually I think for users it would be of more interest to have a high
>>> level
>>> API. IMHO least users in the first step will actually want to declare
>>> using
>>> a particular http stack, but just want to get started most easily with a
>>> stable solution. It's a benefit of your framework to also provide this
>>> pluggability, but I don't see that it must be part of the JAX-RS
>>> standard.
>>> You could just support it "under the hood" for example by setting system
>>> properties etc. What the users want from my understanding is a fluent API
>>> that allows them to talk to any http based REST service. What
>>> technical way
>>> this is done is of low interest. Proof: Nobody asked to ever add such a
>>> plugability into JAX-RS 1 (server side) so far. So why should one ask for
>>> that on the client side?
>>>
>>
>> Are you talking about the SPI for plugging in a back-end like Apache
>> HTTP Client? (That's what I think you are talking about). If thats what
>> you are talking about, I don't really care that much if it is offered or
>> not in the spec. Just thought it was something that should be
>> considered. We added it in our framework because GAE users couldn't use
>> Apache Http Client.
>>
>
> Oh yeah, we also added it so that we could have a "local-only" executor for
> unit testing, which was also pretty useful.
>
>
> --
> Bill Burke
> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
> http://bill.burkecentral.com
>