On 5 April 2016 at 14:19, Bill Burke <bburke(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 4/5/2016 7:47 AM, Marek Posolda wrote:
2) Use JAX-RS 2 client
>
> +1
>
> But it will be good if people have possibility to configure the details
> of underlying Apache HTTP Client (connection pooling, connection/socket
> timeouts, tls etc). If it's possible to achieve it and use JAX-RS 2 client
> at the same time, it will be cool. Otherwise if we need to choose just one
> of these, the "configurability" of Apache HTTP client is more important
IMO.
>
Sticking with RestEasy Client makes the assumption that all users use
other JBoss projects. We know that's not true as Tomcat, Jetty and Spring
adapters all have a lot of use. IMO we should either convert to JAX-RS 2
client or use Apache HTTP client directly (I'm not to keen on that though).
At least we may just have possibility to inject underlying javax.ws.rs.client.Client
during creation of admin-client. So if someone is on resteasy and wants to
tweak Apache HTTP Client, he can use RestEasy API to build client by
himself and inject it. If he's using some other library, he would need to
use it's API to build client (and possibly configure connection pooling etc
in library specific way).
If you're using Tomcat, Spring or whatever, anything JBoss is evil and
they can't co-exist? That's ridiculous. You're really going to stub out
every single piece of the REST api and/or write your own tool? No....
What's wrong with JAX-RS 2.0?
We revise the rest interface. Either use Resteasy, or they can write
their own clients.
What are you saying here exactly?
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red
Hathttp://bill.burkecentral.com
_______________________________________________
keycloak-dev mailing list
keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev