users@jax-rs-spec.java.net

[jax-rs-spec users] Re: JAX-RS 2.1 - work schedule

From: Santiago Pericasgeertsen <santiago.pericasgeertsen_at_oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 14:54:19 -0500

> On Jan 12, 2017, at 1:54 PM, Markus KARG <markus_at_headcrashing.eu> wrote:
>
> Did we decide that we want this?

 I seem to recall you asking this before. Rx is one of the topics for 2.1 as described on the JCP page. User feedback for the proposal has been very positive.

— Santiago
 
>   <>
> From: Santiago Pericasgeertsen [mailto:santiago.pericasgeertsen_at_oracle.com]
> Sent: Donnerstag, 12. Januar 2017 19:02
> To: jsr370-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net
> Subject: Re: [jax-rs-spec users] JAX-RS 2.1 - work schedule
>
>
>> On Jan 12, 2017, at 12:10 PM, Markus KARG <markus_at_headcrashing.eu <mailto:markus_at_headcrashing.eu>> wrote:
>>
>> The question is whether we actually want the ability to support other reactive implementations, or whether we decide to stick with CompletableStage? The rx intermediate method makes the API more complex for anybody.
>
>
> Same pattern that was used for async() in JAX-RS 2.0. I really don’t see the complexity that you talk about. We obviously need to do “something” if we want to support this.
>
> — Santiago