axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Glen Daniels <g...@thoughtcraft.com>
Subject Re: -1 for SVN revision 727413 (WSDL2Java change)
Date Thu, 05 Feb 2009 13:36:49 GMT
Hi Amila:

Amila Suriarachchi wrote:
>     > Ok. I 'll rename  -lcmn option as -uon (use operation name) to enable
>     > people backward compatibility and
>     > the feature I have mentioned above.
> 
>     +1.
> 
> 
> Ok. then I'll add this option so that we can end up this discussion with
> an agreement. Please give me one or two days I'll do it once I get the time.

Thanks!  Could you please also check the results into the 1.5 branch?
I'd like this change to go out with 1.5.  In the meanwhile I'll see if I
can work on the test case part of it.

>     As a completely separate topic, do you realize that command line options
>     like "-uon" are pretty much wrong according to the standard Unix/GNU
>     conventions?  A single dash is generally used to indicate single-letter
>     options, and the flag/switch options like this can traditionally be
>     combined... so "-uon" should really be equivalent to "-u -o -n".  Longer
>     word-like options are typically indicated GNU-style with a double-dash
>     and real words: "--useOperationName".  Along these lines, I'd really
>     like to redo the command-line processing for WSDL2Java/Java2WSDL one of
>     these days.  It's also been a long-term peeve of mine that you need the
>     "-uri" option when you should be able to just "wsdl2java
>     http://host.com/my.wsdl"....
> 
> 
> I accept your criticism about the convention. But on the other hand I
> don't think users find any critical
> difficulty  using it.
> First of all this may break you own idea you have mentioned above
> 
> - If we weren't doing things RIGHT before, then we should fix the
> default behaviour.  But fixing a bug is the *only* reason to change the
> default.
> 
> Of course here also you can define not following Unix/GNU convention as
> a critical bug worth changing
> existing code.
> 
> Second issue is the backward compatibility. This make an impact on both
> written code and articles. For an example Chinthaka has done a good
> job[1][2][3] in documenting all these parameters. your change may make
> these documents invalid.

Yes, I absolutely agree.  I should have been clearer - I don't think we
should suddenly change the options on people, but rather add another
class like WSDL2Java2 with the new/better options.  We can explain the
change in the docs and let people copy over the wsdl2java.bat/sh file if
they want to default to the new options.  Alternately we could check for
an environment variable "USE_NEW_W2J_OPTS" and respect the new options
only if that is set.

In any case we'd need to have a discussion about it on a dedicated
thread, as you suggest.  I was just mentioning it here because this was
related.

Thanks,
--Glen

Mime
View raw message