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

[jsr339-experts] Re: [jax-rs-spec users] Re: JAX-RS 2.0 compatibility with JAX-RS 1.1

From: Santiago Pericas-Geertsen <Santiago.PericasGeertsen_at_oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 13:39:46 -0400

On Jul 8, 2011, at 1:13 PM, Guilherme Silveira wrote:
> Agreed. As in other posts I am a fan of type safety and refactor friendliness in Java. So hyperlink generation on the server side can be done using proxies as we do in vraptor. Not annotation based ones.
> We also provide linking i.n the mvc part as in; linkTo[myController].method[param]
>
> Then there is no need to repeat uris or centralizing them in a type external to the controller itself
>
> Should I show a proposal for that already?
>
>

 Yes, please make any relevant proposals accessible via our Hypermedia wiki. Thanks.

-- Santiago

>> 2011. 7. 8. ¿ÀÈÄ 2:00¿¡ "Santiago Pericas-Geertsen" <Santiago.PericasGeertsen_at_oracle.com>´ÔÀÌ ÀÛ¼º:
>>
>> Sergey,
>>
>> Backward compatibility for JAX-RS 1.X applications is very important. So adding new methods and new types should be fine, in general. As an example, we looked at Request and Response from JAX-RS 1.X and decided it was too difficult to change these types to accommodate the new requirements, so we opted for the introduction of HttpRequest and HttpResponse instead.
>>
>> I suspect that we want to look at UriBuilder in the context of hyperlinking. But, if a form of declarative hyperlinking is agreed upon, I'm guessing there's probably less of a need to change UriBuilder. Right?
>>
>> -- Santiago
>>
>> On Jul 8, 2011, at 12:07 PM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>>
>> > We've seen some users asking reasonable qu...
>>
>