[DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
17 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

Guillaume Nodet
Administrator
Just want to start a discussion on WS-Notification because I've had a chat
last week with a ServiceMix user about that.

That component is not heavily used, but we always have a few users reporting
bugs and such.   This component is really the only one which is no
replacement in Camel.   Given WS-Notification is really just an
implementation of a WSDL, I wonder if it would be easier to simply port it
to a pure CXF web service so that it would not be tied to JBI anymore, and
would also solve a bunch of problems related to the behavior of
WS-Addressing inside the JBI bus (which is not really what users expect when
using WS-Notification).

So I'd like to gauge the interest in re-architecting this component to make
it more easily consumable without JBI / NMR, just as a JAX-WS web service
(if possible even with no ties to CXF).    We could then maybe plan a few
enhancements such as the use of non simple topics definitions and such.

--
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

Jean-Baptiste Onofré
Agree,

I think that WS-Notification should be hosted/implemented in CXF.

It's WS-* related and currently to tied to JBI/NMR. We should be able to
provide a more generic implementation, compliant with the new SMX5 designs.

+1 to refactore and move to CXF.

Regards
JB

On 07/08/2011 10:20 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:

> Just want to start a discussion on WS-Notification because I've had a chat
> last week with a ServiceMix user about that.
>
> That component is not heavily used, but we always have a few users reporting
> bugs and such.   This component is really the only one which is no
> replacement in Camel.   Given WS-Notification is really just an
> implementation of a WSDL, I wonder if it would be easier to simply port it
> to a pure CXF web service so that it would not be tied to JBI anymore, and
> would also solve a bunch of problems related to the behavior of
> WS-Addressing inside the JBI bus (which is not really what users expect when
> using WS-Notification).
>
> So I'd like to gauge the interest in re-architecting this component to make
> it more easily consumable without JBI / NMR, just as a JAX-WS web service
> (if possible even with no ties to CXF).    We could then maybe plan a few
> enhancements such as the use of non simple topics definitions and such.
>

--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[hidden email]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

Guillaume Nodet
Administrator
I did not initially thought about moving it into CXF, but that's definitely
to consider if CXF is willing to take over the code base.

On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 10:26, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Agree,
>
> I think that WS-Notification should be hosted/implemented in CXF.
>
> It's WS-* related and currently to tied to JBI/NMR. We should be able to
> provide a more generic implementation, compliant with the new SMX5 designs.
>
> +1 to refactore and move to CXF.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On 07/08/2011 10:20 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>
>> Just want to start a discussion on WS-Notification because I've had a chat
>> last week with a ServiceMix user about that.
>>
>> That component is not heavily used, but we always have a few users
>> reporting
>> bugs and such.   This component is really the only one which is no
>> replacement in Camel.   Given WS-Notification is really just an
>> implementation of a WSDL, I wonder if it would be easier to simply port it
>> to a pure CXF web service so that it would not be tied to JBI anymore, and
>> would also solve a bunch of problems related to the behavior of
>> WS-Addressing inside the JBI bus (which is not really what users expect
>> when
>> using WS-Notification).
>>
>> So I'd like to gauge the interest in re-architecting this component to
>> make
>> it more easily consumable without JBI / NMR, just as a JAX-WS web service
>> (if possible even with no ties to CXF).    We could then maybe plan a few
>> enhancements such as the use of non simple topics definitions and such.
>>
>>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> [hidden email]
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>



--
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

Freeman-2
+1 for  re-architect wsn component and also +1 for move the ws-
notification into CXF, I'll post discussion about it on CXF  
maillinglist.

Freeman
On 2011-7-8, at 下午4:45, Guillaume Nodet wrote:

> I did not initially thought about moving it into CXF, but that's  
> definitely
> to consider if CXF is willing to take over the code base.
>
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 10:26, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[hidden email]>  
> wrote:
>
>> Agree,
>>
>> I think that WS-Notification should be hosted/implemented in CXF.
>>
>> It's WS-* related and currently to tied to JBI/NMR. We should be  
>> able to
>> provide a more generic implementation, compliant with the new SMX5  
>> designs.
>>
>> +1 to refactore and move to CXF.
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>>
>> On 07/08/2011 10:20 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>
>>> Just want to start a discussion on WS-Notification because I've  
>>> had a chat
>>> last week with a ServiceMix user about that.
>>>
>>> That component is not heavily used, but we always have a few users
>>> reporting
>>> bugs and such.   This component is really the only one which is no
>>> replacement in Camel.   Given WS-Notification is really just an
>>> implementation of a WSDL, I wonder if it would be easier to simply  
>>> port it
>>> to a pure CXF web service so that it would not be tied to JBI  
>>> anymore, and
>>> would also solve a bunch of problems related to the behavior of
>>> WS-Addressing inside the JBI bus (which is not really what users  
>>> expect
>>> when
>>> using WS-Notification).
>>>
>>> So I'd like to gauge the interest in re-architecting this  
>>> component to
>>> make
>>> it more easily consumable without JBI / NMR, just as a JAX-WS web  
>>> service
>>> (if possible even with no ties to CXF).    We could then maybe  
>>> plan a few
>>> enhancements such as the use of non simple topics definitions and  
>>> such.
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> [hidden email]
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com

---------------------------------------------
Freeman Fang

FuseSource
Email:[hidden email]
Web: fusesource.com
Twitter: freemanfang
Blog: http://freemanfang.blogspot.com









Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

lorenzo.martinelli
ServiceMix is the only implementation for WS-Notification (I haven't found others): WS-Notification isn't so popular. The next release for service mix will support this standard? Re-architecting this component in CXF is so important for ServiceMix project (WS-Notification in my opinion is "dead")?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

Guillaume Nodet
Administrator
I'm not sure to actually understand what you think.
Do you think we should re-architect the component around cxf or do you think
the ws-notification spec is dead and that nobody will use it in the future ?

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:01, lorenzo.martinelli <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> ServiceMix is the only implementation for WS-Notification (I haven't found
> others): WS-Notification isn't so popular. The next release for service mix
> will support this standard? Re-architecting this component in CXF is so
> important for ServiceMix project (WS-Notification in my opinion is "dead")?
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://servicemix.396122.n5.nabble.com/DiSCUSS-WS-Notification-tp4563871p4821864.html
> Sent from the ServiceMix - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>



--
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

lorenzo.martinelli
The second: ws-notification spec is dead and few projects use it now and in future.
A standard is "living" if there are many implementations, but for WS-Notification I know only one implementation: ServiceMix
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

Jean-Baptiste Onofré
Hi Lorenzo,

we already discussed of the WS-Notification component in the past.

As the ServiceMix Components will progressively go to deprecation, we
propose to "migrate" the WSN implementation into Apache CXF.

To summarize, the ServiceMix WSN notification will be replace by a CXF
implementation.

Regards
JB

On 09/20/2011 01:44 PM, lorenzo.martinelli wrote:
> The second: ws-notification spec is dead and few projects use it now and in
> future.
> A standard is "living" if there are many implementations, but for
> WS-Notification I know only one implementation: ServiceMix
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://servicemix.396122.n5.nabble.com/DiSCUSS-WS-Notification-tp4563871p4822205.html
> Sent from the ServiceMix - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[hidden email]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

lorenzo.martinelli
Thank you for your response, but I'm not interested on WSN implementation (component or Apache CXF), but if there will be an implementation of WSN. If I understood correctly the response is yes: WSN will be reimplemented with Apache CXF and ServiceMix will support WSN in future.

Thank's
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

Jean-Baptiste Onofré
ServiceMix will support WSN via the CXF implementation.

The underlying question is: does it really make sense to implement WSN
in CXF :)

Regards
JB

On 09/20/2011 01:57 PM, lorenzo.martinelli wrote:

> Thank you for your response, but I'm not interested on WSN implementation
> (component or Apache CXF), but if there will be an implementation of WSN. If
> I understood correctly the response is yes: WSN will be reimplemented with
> Apache CXF and ServiceMix will support WSN in future.
>
> Thank's
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://servicemix.396122.n5.nabble.com/DiSCUSS-WS-Notification-tp4563871p4822249.html
> Sent from the ServiceMix - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[hidden email]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

lorenzo.martinelli
Ok, all it's clear

Thank's
Lorenzo
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

Guillaume Nodet
Administrator
In reply to this post by Guillaume Nodet
I've started to re-architect the WS-Notification implementation to get rid
of JBI and be pure JAX-WS based.
The results are available at https://github.com/gnodet/wsn .
I think there was a consensus to move the code base to CXF, but I just want
to make sure everyone agree.
Also, I'd like to keep the implementation lightweight and keep it pure JAXWS
based if possible.

On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 10:20, Guillaume Nodet <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Just want to start a discussion on WS-Notification because I've had a chat
> last week with a ServiceMix user about that.
>
> That component is not heavily used, but we always have a few users
> reporting bugs and such.   This component is really the only one which is no
> replacement in Camel.   Given WS-Notification is really just an
> implementation of a WSDL, I wonder if it would be easier to simply port it
> to a pure CXF web service so that it would not be tied to JBI anymore, and
> would also solve a bunch of problems related to the behavior of
> WS-Addressing inside the JBI bus (which is not really what users expect when
> using WS-Notification).
>
> So I'd like to gauge the interest in re-architecting this component to make
> it more easily consumable without JBI / NMR, just as a JAX-WS web service
> (if possible even with no ties to CXF).    We could then maybe plan a few
> enhancements such as the use of non simple topics definitions and such.
>
> --
> ------------------------
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>
>


--
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

Claus Ibsen-2
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Guillaume Nodet <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I've started to re-architect the WS-Notification implementation to get rid
> of JBI and be pure JAX-WS based.
> The results are available at https://github.com/gnodet/wsn .
> I think there was a consensus to move the code base to CXF, but I just want
> to make sure everyone agree.
> Also, I'd like to keep the implementation lightweight and keep it pure JAXWS
> based if possible.
>

Great move.


> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 10:20, Guillaume Nodet <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Just want to start a discussion on WS-Notification because I've had a chat
>> last week with a ServiceMix user about that.
>>
>> That component is not heavily used, but we always have a few users
>> reporting bugs and such.   This component is really the only one which is no
>> replacement in Camel.   Given WS-Notification is really just an
>> implementation of a WSDL, I wonder if it would be easier to simply port it
>> to a pure CXF web service so that it would not be tied to JBI anymore, and
>> would also solve a bunch of problems related to the behavior of
>> WS-Addressing inside the JBI bus (which is not really what users expect when
>> using WS-Notification).
>>
>> So I'd like to gauge the interest in re-architecting this component to make
>> it more easily consumable without JBI / NMR, just as a JAX-WS web service
>> (if possible even with no ties to CXF).    We could then maybe plan a few
>> enhancements such as the use of non simple topics definitions and such.
>>
>> --
>> ------------------------
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> ------------------------
>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>> ------------------------
>> Open Source SOA
>> http://fusesource.com
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>



--
Claus Ibsen
-----------------
FuseSource
Email: [hidden email]
Web: http://fusesource.com
Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews
Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

Jean-Baptiste Onofré
In reply to this post by Guillaume Nodet
Awesome Guillaume.

Really great work. As already discussed, it makes sense to me to donate
this into CXF.

Thanks again,
Regards
JB

On 10/05/2011 05:22 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:

> I've started to re-architect the WS-Notification implementation to get rid
> of JBI and be pure JAX-WS based.
> The results are available at https://github.com/gnodet/wsn .
> I think there was a consensus to move the code base to CXF, but I just want
> to make sure everyone agree.
> Also, I'd like to keep the implementation lightweight and keep it pure JAXWS
> based if possible.
>
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 10:20, Guillaume Nodet<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>
>> Just want to start a discussion on WS-Notification because I've had a chat
>> last week with a ServiceMix user about that.
>>
>> That component is not heavily used, but we always have a few users
>> reporting bugs and such.   This component is really the only one which is no
>> replacement in Camel.   Given WS-Notification is really just an
>> implementation of a WSDL, I wonder if it would be easier to simply port it
>> to a pure CXF web service so that it would not be tied to JBI anymore, and
>> would also solve a bunch of problems related to the behavior of
>> WS-Addressing inside the JBI bus (which is not really what users expect when
>> using WS-Notification).
>>
>> So I'd like to gauge the interest in re-architecting this component to make
>> it more easily consumable without JBI / NMR, just as a JAX-WS web service
>> (if possible even with no ties to CXF).    We could then maybe plan a few
>> enhancements such as the use of non simple topics definitions and such.
>>
>> --
>> ------------------------
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> ------------------------
>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>> ------------------------
>> Open Source SOA
>> http://fusesource.com
>>
>>
>
>

--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[hidden email]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

Daniel  Kulp
In reply to this post by Guillaume Nodet
On Wednesday, October 05, 2011 5:22:01 PM Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> I've started to re-architect the WS-Notification implementation to get rid
> of JBI and be pure JAX-WS based.
> The results are available at https://github.com/gnodet/wsn .
> I think there was a consensus to move the code base to CXF, but I just want
> to make sure everyone agree.

I definitely agree.  :-)   Very excited about that prospect.  :-)

How close to ready is it?   Is it something that we can get into CXF shortly
for inclusion with CXF 2.5?


> Also, I'd like to keep the implementation lightweight and keep it pure JAXWS
> based if possible.

I'm quite a bit less excited about this.   I would say pure jaxws + cxf-
common-utilities is fine as it should likely use the CXF logging stuff, CXF
XML utilities (DOMUtils, etc...), etc...  duplicating stuff from common to
just avoid a dep is silly to me.

Dan



>
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 10:20, Guillaume Nodet <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Just want to start a discussion on WS-Notification because I've had a
> > chat last week with a ServiceMix user about that.
> >
> > That component is not heavily used, but we always have a few users
> > reporting bugs and such.   This component is really the only one which
> > is no replacement in Camel.   Given WS-Notification is really just an
> > implementation of a WSDL, I wonder if it would be easier to simply port
> > it to a pure CXF web service so that it would not be tied to JBI
> > anymore, and would also solve a bunch of problems related to the
> > behavior of
> > WS-Addressing inside the JBI bus (which is not really what users expect
> > when using WS-Notification).
> >
> > So I'd like to gauge the interest in re-architecting this component to
> > make it more easily consumable without JBI / NMR, just as a JAX-WS web
> > service (if possible even with no ties to CXF).    We could then maybe
> > plan a few enhancements such as the use of non simple topics
> > definitions and such.
> >
> > --
> > ------------------------
> > Guillaume Nodet
> > ------------------------
> > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> > ------------------------
> > Open Source SOA
> > http://fusesource.com
--
Daniel Kulp
[hidden email]
http://dankulp.com/blog
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

Guillaume Nodet
Administrator
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 18:01, Daniel Kulp <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wednesday, October 05, 2011 5:22:01 PM Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> > I've started to re-architect the WS-Notification implementation to get
> rid
> > of JBI and be pure JAX-WS based.
> > The results are available at https://github.com/gnodet/wsn .
> > I think there was a consensus to move the code base to CXF, but I just
> want
> > to make sure everyone agree.
>
> I definitely agree.  :-)   Very excited about that prospect.  :-)
>
> How close to ready is it?   Is it something that we can get into CXF
> shortly
> for inclusion with CXF 2.5?
>

The code is really the same than in ServiceMix, only the JBI bits have been
replaced by JAX-WS.
A few tests would definitely help, but the code base itself is mostly done.
I recall some users would have been interested in having more features like
complex topics or such, but not having those features does not mean the base
service is not usable.


>
>
> > Also, I'd like to keep the implementation lightweight and keep it pure
> JAXWS
> > based if possible.
>
> I'm quite a bit less excited about this.   I would say pure jaxws + cxf-
> common-utilities is fine as it should likely use the CXF logging stuff, CXF
> XML utilities (DOMUtils, etc...), etc...  duplicating stuff from common to
> just avoid a dep is silly to me.
>

Yeah, I meant I'd like to be independent of the jaxws provider.
The code is currently using slf4j for logging though.


>
> Dan
>
>
>
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 10:20, Guillaume Nodet <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > Just want to start a discussion on WS-Notification because I've had a
> > > chat last week with a ServiceMix user about that.
> > >
> > > That component is not heavily used, but we always have a few users
> > > reporting bugs and such.   This component is really the only one which
> > > is no replacement in Camel.   Given WS-Notification is really just an
> > > implementation of a WSDL, I wonder if it would be easier to simply port
> > > it to a pure CXF web service so that it would not be tied to JBI
> > > anymore, and would also solve a bunch of problems related to the
> > > behavior of
> > > WS-Addressing inside the JBI bus (which is not really what users expect
> > > when using WS-Notification).
> > >
> > > So I'd like to gauge the interest in re-architecting this component to
> > > make it more easily consumable without JBI / NMR, just as a JAX-WS web
> > > service (if possible even with no ties to CXF).    We could then maybe
> > > plan a few enhancements such as the use of non simple topics
> > > definitions and such.
> > >
> > > --
> > > ------------------------
> > > Guillaume Nodet
> > > ------------------------
> > > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> > > ------------------------
> > > Open Source SOA
> > > http://fusesource.com
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> [hidden email]
> http://dankulp.com/blog
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>



--
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DiSCUSS] WS-Notification

Daniel  Kulp

Just wanted to mention that Guillaume and I have been chatting a bit about the
code on the CXF IRC channel today.   He ran into some differences with various
JAX-WS implementations:

http://irclogs.dankulp.com/logs/irclogger_log/cxf?date=2011-10-05,Wed&sel=128#l124

that required some "less clean" code.   Nothing major.   We also talked about
the JMS stuff currently being tied to ActiveMQ and options around that:

http://irclogs.dankulp.com/logs/irclogger_log/cxf?date=2011-10-05,Wed&sel=194#l190

That last stuff is definitely not critical (tied to ActiveMQ is perfectly fine
for now as long as we mention that).

Dan




On Wednesday, October 05, 2011 6:13:15 PM Guillaume Nodet wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 18:01, Daniel Kulp <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 05, 2011 5:22:01 PM Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> > > I've started to re-architect the WS-Notification implementation to
> > > get
> >
> > rid
> >
> > > of JBI and be pure JAX-WS based.
> > > The results are available at https://github.com/gnodet/wsn .
> > > I think there was a consensus to move the code base to CXF, but I
> > > just
> >
> > want
> >
> > > to make sure everyone agree.
> >
> > I definitely agree.  :-)   Very excited about that prospect.  :-)
> >
> > How close to ready is it?   Is it something that we can get into CXF
> > shortly
> > for inclusion with CXF 2.5?
>
> The code is really the same than in ServiceMix, only the JBI bits have been
> replaced by JAX-WS.
> A few tests would definitely help, but the code base itself is mostly done.
> I recall some users would have been interested in having more features like
> complex topics or such, but not having those features does not mean the base
> service is not usable.
>
> > > Also, I'd like to keep the implementation lightweight and keep it
> > > pure
> >
> > JAXWS
> >
> > > based if possible.
> >
> > I'm quite a bit less excited about this.   I would say pure jaxws + cxf-
> > common-utilities is fine as it should likely use the CXF logging stuff,
> > CXF XML utilities (DOMUtils, etc...), etc...  duplicating stuff from
> > common to just avoid a dep is silly to me.
>
> Yeah, I meant I'd like to be independent of the jaxws provider.
> The code is currently using slf4j for logging though.
>
> > Dan
> >
> > > On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 10:20, Guillaume Nodet <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > Just want to start a discussion on WS-Notification because I've
> > > > had a
> > > > chat last week with a ServiceMix user about that.
> > > >
> > > > That component is not heavily used, but we always have a few
> > > > users
> > > > reporting bugs and such.   This component is really the only one
> > > > which is no replacement in Camel.   Given WS-Notification is
> > > > really just an implementation of a WSDL, I wonder if it would
> > > > be easier to simply port it to a pure CXF web service so that
> > > > it would not be tied to JBI anymore, and would also solve a
> > > > bunch of problems related to the behavior of
> > > > WS-Addressing inside the JBI bus (which is not really what users
> > > > expect when using WS-Notification).
> > > >
> > > > So I'd like to gauge the interest in re-architecting this
> > > > component to make it more easily consumable without JBI / NMR,
> > > > just as a JAX-WS web service (if possible even with no ties to
> > > > CXF).    We could then maybe plan a few enhancements such as
> > > > the use of non simple topics definitions and such.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > ------------------------
> > > > Guillaume Nodet
> > > > ------------------------
> > > > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> > > > ------------------------
> > > > Open Source SOA
> > > > http://fusesource.com
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Kulp
> > [hidden email]
> > http://dankulp.com/blog
> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
--
Daniel Kulp
[hidden email]
http://dankulp.com/blog
Talend - http://www.talend.com