[jax-rs-spec users] [jsr339-experts] Re: Re: MVC

From: Sergey Beryozkin <>
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 14:09:55 +0100

Hi Bill
On 03/06/14 13:59, Bill Burke wrote:
> On 6/3/2014 6:56 AM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>> Hi Bill
>> On 02/06/14 13:32, Bill Burke wrote:
>>> So far I just have little things that I've run into over the past year:
>>> * Basic Auth support in the client API
>>> * Allow ContainerRequestContext and ContainerResponseContext to be
>>> injectable via @Context.
>>> * add method for obtaining client IP address to ContainerRequestContext
>>> * Injectable ContainerRequestContext allows properties to be viewed/set
>>> in JAX-RS methods
>>> * Injectable ContainerResponseContext allows Locators to add things like
>>> cookies to the response.
>>> * Some standard way of doing a forward like in Servlet spec.
>>> * Allow filters to be bindable via a @Path expression.
>>> * @Context should work directly with application class. i.e. you should
>>> be able to inject
>>> class MyApplication extends Application {}
>>> via
>>> @Context MyApplication app;
>> All of it is possibly a very good list of improvements but I'm not
>> seeing it qualifying for as in really the next phase of
>> JAX-RS development/improvement, it is a list of improving of what we
>> already have, except for
> Why the urge or need to create a Are you bored?

No, I'm not. Good to hear you are not too :-).
> Minus some
> incremental improvement, JAX-RS is done IMO.
-1. If people won't be able to ultimately have their investments into
JAX-RS supported alongside existing UI building systems then it will be
a compete failure IMHO
> There's always this
> propensity to "rule the world".
What are you talking about Bill ? It does not make sense. It is about
letting people do JAX-RS not only with Angular JS, this is what it is about.
>> "Some standard way of doing a forward like in Servlet spec."
>> I read it as "support MVC" :-). I'm not 100% sure how Jersey does,
>> probably via RequestDispatcher.forward too, but this is how CXF
>> 'controls' binding the 'model' to the 'view' handlers
> No, it just means i want a way to forward to static resources. Big
> difference from creating a full-blown MVC framework.

Are you misunderstanding the purpose of this possible effort by any
chance ? AFAIK it is only about making the JAX-RS response (with or
without the model entity) available to some view handler. I'd -1 myself
the effort to build our own view handling system.

When you redirect to a static resource it is MVC too by the way.



Sergey Beryozkin
Talend Community Coders