>>We've used it in a production environment. We subsequently decided to
>>switch from Jersey to RestEasy, which has a parallel capability.
>
>This is probably a bit off-topic but, may I ask you why did you switch
>to RESTEasy at the end? I guess the reason was not something related to
>the jersey-proxy-client since you didn't mention any problem with
>that...
No problems. We switched to RestEasy simply because we were using
RestEasy for other applications (with JBoss, which used RestEasy
internally) and wanted a consistent platform for our developers. The
Jersey client works well.
--
Guy Rouillier
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus