On Mon October 26 2009 8:20:23 am Benson Margulies wrote:
> I started this, so now that I'm a committer I can finish it.
>
> However, I'd be grateful for some opinions. Does anyone object to hiding
> the message about cxf.xml in conditions where it's not terribly relevant?
> Can we decide to do this automatically?
Honestly, I think the message should be "reversed". Basically, if we don't
find a cxf.xml on the classpath, just ignore and continue silently. If we DO
find one, put an INFO message of "Using config from ....."
> Can anyone shed any light on the
> other message?
Is it still an issue? At one point, we were seriously mixing up some
@Resource annotations for the Bus using name="cxf" for some and name="bus" for
others. Since we didn't have a bean named "bus", (the name is "cxf" in the
config) they didn't resolve. A while ago, I went through and made them all
name="cxf" where appropriate and removed many of them entirely if possible.
Thus, that message might not even occur anymore.
--
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@...
http://www.dankulp.com/blog
