jsr339-experts@jax-rs-spec.java.net

[jsr339-experts] Re: [jax-rs-spec users] Re: Re: Proposal to downgrade [JAX_RS_SPEC-39] Client Cache Support to MINOR

From: Markus KARG <markus_at_headcrashing.eu>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 20:16:18 +0200

Exactly what I fight against! As a Java Expert Group our target must be that no proprietary API must be used. Caching is a basic feature of http, and so it must be useable without proprietary stuff.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marek Potociar [mailto:marek.potociar_at_oracle.com]
> Sent: Freitag, 13. Mai 2011 12:35
> To: jsr339-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net
> Cc: Markus KARG; 'Bill Burke'
> Subject: Re: [jsr339-experts] Re: [jax-rs-spec users] Re: Re: Proposal
> to downgrade [JAX_RS_SPEC-39] Client Cache Support to MINOR
>
>
>
> On 05/12/2011 07:43 PM, Markus KARG wrote:
> > Agreed, but in a standalone client application the application's http
> transport provider is provided by the JAX RS Implementation, isn't it?
> How should an application enable caching then?
>
> Through a proprietary client provider API.
>
> Marek
>
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Marek Potociar [mailto:marek.potociar_at_oracle.com]
> >> Sent: Donnerstag, 12. Mai 2011 16:31
> >> To: jsr339-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net
> >> Cc: Bill Burke
> >> Subject: [jsr339-experts] Re: [jax-rs-spec users] Re: Re: Proposal
> to
> >> downgrade [JAX_RS_SPEC-39] Client Cache Support to MINOR
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 05/12/2011 01:49 PM, Bill Burke wrote:
> >>> Caches are essential, but they don't necessarily belong in the JAX-
> RS
> >> specification.
> >>
> >> +1 for me it's actually one level down. The HTTP transport provider
> >> should take care of that.
> >>
> >> Marek
> >