axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Chathura Herath" <chath...@opensource.lk>
Subject RE: [Axis2] Couple of quick comments
Date Wed, 04 May 2005 09:57:22 GMT
Hi Deepal, Glen, all

IMO We will need one of "OperationContext" or "MEPContext"(That is Rename
the MEPContext already there to OperationContext or leave it as it is). I
don't see strong reasons why we need both OperationContext and MEPContext.

As far as I know the AxisOperation is there and continue to be there to
represent the deployment time configuration of the WSDL Operations, and
don't think there are any arguments over that. 

If you want to stick a module into an Operation, fine. Put it in the
AxisOperation along with other deployment information of the Operation.

Thanks,
Chathura

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Deepal Jayasinghe [mailto:deepal@opensource.lk]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 2:04 PM
> To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org; Srinath Perera
> Subject: Re: [Axis2] Couple of quick comments
> 
> 
> Hi all;
> 
> see my comments below
> 
> Deepal
> 
> > Hi Glen;
> >
> > On 5/4/05, Glen Daniels <glen@thoughtcraft.com> wrote:
> >> 1) I still like OperationContext WAY better than MEPContext.  When did
> >> we decide on MEPContext?  WSDL calls them "operations"....  Consider
> >> this a request to change it back, or at least VOTE on it.
> >
> > let me say Bit of histry how we end up here :)
> > We use to  have both OperationContext and MEPcontext,
> > OperationContext - info for one operation across the lifetime of the
> > operation
> > MEPContext - ino for single message exchange, OperationContext has
> > number of MEP context stored in it.
> > Then we put the information in the OperationContext to the
> > AxisOperation and get rid of Operation context.
> >
> > Changing current MEPContext -> OperationContext might be wrong as it
> > is about all "instance" of MEP, in that sense the name MEPContext is
> > wrong too .. the mep context is about a "intraction" rather than
> > "interaction pattern".
> 
> 
> Since we are going to have operation specific modules, I feel we should
> have
> operation context. Because now the handler chain is not service based it
> is
> going to be operation based so in that case we really need to have
> operation
> context.
> 
> 
> 
> I am stuck with implementation until we finalize this thing (are we going
> to
> have operation context or not)
> 
> 
> 
> I am +1 for keeping both MEP context and operation context.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > Actually now I do mind less about the exact naming than, changing the
> > name too often and I had to refactor and do the fixing ;)
> > Thanks
> > Srinath
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 




Mime
View raw message