RESTEasy or Jersey? [closed]

One nice value-add feature of Jersey is the Jersey Test Framework which lets you run and test your Jersey REST services inside JUnit, without the need to first deploy them to a stand-alone server and even before you commit your code to your repo.

These tests are easy to write, you can run them before you even check in your Jersey web service code to make sure your service is working, and they become part of your automated test suite which helps enforce the contract your services have with your clients.

See this article for more information if you're using Jersety 1.X or this one for 2.x.

Another nice feature is support for the REST MVC pattern, which would allow you to return a View from your Jersey services rather than just data (the Model). Compatibility with the Jersey Test Framework is still maturing in this regard, but it is workable.

See this article for more information on that:

http://usna86-techbits.blogspot.com/2013/12/jersey-jerseytest-migration-from-1x-to.html

I think the REST API & the implementation is almost like a very vanilla features. So both works the same way. But one major difference is in RESTEasy it is very difficult to generate the WADL API.Especially when the customers want to check the REST APi calls., the WADL will help a lot like WSDL.