jsr339-experts@jax-rs-spec.java.net
[jsr339-experts] jaxb link stuff should not be there?
This message
: [
Message body
] [ More options (
top
,
bottom
) ]
Related messages
: [
Next message
] [
Previous message
] [
Next in thread
] [
Replies
]
Contemporary messages sorted
: [
by date
] [
by thread
] [
by subject
] [
by author
] [
by messages with attachments
]
From
: Bill Burke <
bburke_at_redhat.com
>
Date
: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 17:42:19 -0500
I see you've made Link and Link.Builder abstract/interfaces. SHould you
then remove the Jaxb classes?
-- Bill Burke JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://bill.burkecentral.com
This message
: [
Message body
]
Next message
:
Bill Burke: "[jsr339-experts] Why do we need new UriInfo Methods?"
Previous message
:
Sergey Beryozkin: "[jsr339-experts] Re: [jax-rs-spec users] Re: FYI - _at_BindingPriority has been replaced with common javax.annotation.Priority"
Next in thread
:
Santiago Pericas-Geertsen: "[jsr339-experts] Re: [jax-rs-spec users] jaxb link stuff should not be there?"
Reply
:
Santiago Pericas-Geertsen: "[jsr339-experts] Re: [jax-rs-spec users] jaxb link stuff should not be there?"
Contemporary messages sorted
: [
by date
] [
by thread
] [
by subject
] [
by author
] [
by messages with attachments
]