From axis-dev-return-76696-apmail-ws-axis-dev-archive=ws.apache.org@ws.apache.org Fri Sep 04 06:02:44 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 80440 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2009 06:02:44 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Sep 2009 06:02:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 94575 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2009 06:02:43 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-dev-archive@ws.apache.org Received: (qmail 94441 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2009 06:02:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list axis-dev@ws.apache.org Received: (qmail 94429 invoked by uid 99); 4 Sep 2009 06:02:43 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Sep 2009 06:02:43 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of cchinu@gmail.com designates 209.85.222.186 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.222.186] (HELO mail-pz0-f186.google.com) (209.85.222.186) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Sep 2009 06:02:31 +0000 Received: by pzk16 with SMTP id 16so492475pzk.18 for ; Thu, 03 Sep 2009 23:02:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=rRysy6dSfQQ1ds70Bt5AxhnaTYXdTP8pSw+Ev4UjC1c=; b=c2uRrAlZ/uB5w0EFKY6fg9IT2UETyFJpK4N4BIugXoDRFiMTBs9gBDDNebI3tuRXuV XrDceliploEqBjAB9C8ji89g5sYyQrZZANj4S1JhSGG9e+01leQdOHjXYgUcvo9WQX1H FFEaC0BMCv2DfpvcX6EUAu0KME9e1YgHug18k= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=W8EntUPKzrkrtD+2zuAVw/C0xqyaf5sXGlR22LEVIjBuRBKrEHrsoKXrOWlUmDvGSO 4pkQMQ9pX4Aq1ok6865acO8SJlJ3BDNkmbrHpcfbzu45pMGkwmSvscng1gAyOVQLX3IP RcZU+HlfxXhHwNw4sMIWCjlKCyR4Bi0Nnv4FU= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.140.2 with SMTP id n2mr2963769rvd.36.1252044131004; Thu, 03 Sep 2009 23:02:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <60708f4b0909032152k2c9e7d45h912f6949afd3a22d@mail.gmail.com> References: <4A992E87.9030301@gmail.com> <88f5d710909030416n3377eea3i47e6f70758471a9f@mail.gmail.com> <60708f4b0909032152k2c9e7d45h912f6949afd3a22d@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 11:32:10 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Supporting hierarchical service deployment From: Chinmoy Chakraborty To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd24ea0abf4120472ba3d56 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --000e0cd24ea0abf4120472ba3d56 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Amila Suriarachchi < amilasuriarachchi@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Chinmoy Chakraborty wrote: > >> Paul, >> >> May be I dropped in from nowhere but I like to understand the idea. What >> is the purpose of maintaining duplicate data by allowing exact same AAR to >> be deployed in two different parts of hierarchy? >> > It is not exact AAR file. It is basically organise your AAR file in a > directory structure without putting all of the in the root directory. > > eg. > repository/services/admin/AdminService.aar > repository/services/management/Management.aar > repository/services/tech/v1.1/Tech.aar > repository/services/tech/v1.0/Tech.aar > > if you take latter two cases, it may be two versions of same .aar file > which user wants to active at the same time. > CHINMOY>> OK. > > >> I guess Axis2 should also support same service name with different >> namespaces. I have this kind of requirement in our project but right now >> it's a limitation. >> > if you can describe your requirement then we can see how it can be > supported. > > As I understood what you want to have is same service name with different > name spaces to distinguish the version. > (I assume version depends on the namespace in your case) > CHINMOY>> Not exactly. I have two different services with same service name and they do absolutely two different tasks. let me explain: I have one function called ABS (returns absolute value, generally long) and a routinecalled ABS (does some other work than ABS function). Let's say the namespace for ABS function is abc.function.ABS and the namespace for ABS routine is abc.routine.ABS. So we can have two different services for the same service name. In AXIS 1.x we could do that since there was concept of jws deployment and the directory structure was part of the url. > > Now the problem is what is the epr for these two services. In the above > solution epr is mapped to the folder structure. So people can invoke two > services with different eprs. > > In your solution how to determine the service to invoke once a request > receive? > CHINMOY>> If we have a parameter in services.xml like abc.function/routine then in the url the service name should be appened with namespace. e.g ../services/ABS (now) ../service/abc.function.ABS The logic should be just add namespace along with the servicename and the namespace is available from the services.xml. Chinmoy > > thanks, > Amila. > >> >> Chinmoy >> >> On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Paul Fremantle wrote: >> >>> Chinmoy >>> >>> I think that is cool, but I guess the aim of Isuru's initial proposal >>> was to allow the exact same AAR to be deployed independently in two >>> parts of the hierarchy. To me that is a good objective. >>> >>> Paul >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Chinmoy Chakraborty >>> wrote: >>> > Guys, >>> > >>> > How about introducing a new parameter (e.g ServiceClassNameSpace) in >>> the >>> > services.xml to support directory hierarchy in the service? >>> > >>> > Chinmoy >>> > >>> > On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Isuru Suriarachchi >>> > wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Hi all, >>> >> >>> >> As using '/' character may cause problems in dispatching, I just used >>> a >>> >> separate character ('!') to represent the directory hierarchy in the >>> >> service. This allows all types of services to be deployed >>> hierarchically >>> >> without any problems (Including RESTful services). >>> >> >>> >> Ex: if we deploy the Echo service at >>> >> /repository/services/foo/bar/1.0.0/echo.aar, service name will be >>> >> foo!bar!1.0.0!Echo and the EPR will be like >>> >> ../axis2/services/foo!bar!1.0.0!Echo/echoString >>> >> >>> >> I've attached a new patch to the JIRA >>> >> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-4479). This patch >>> doesn't >>> >> contain any changes in dispatching logics. And also I've implemented >>> the >>> >> ability to deploy JAXWS, Pojo etc.. (which are coming from the >>> axis2.xml) >>> >> services hierarchically to make this effort complete. In addition to >>> that, >>> >> I've written some deployment tests for hierarchical services. >>> >> >>> >> Thanks, >>> >> ~Isuru >>> >> >>> >> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 2:48 AM, keith chapman < >>> keithgchapman@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> I've been out of touch with the Axis2 list for some time. Took a >>> while to >>> >>> read this thread. Just a few thouths on it. >>> >>> >>> >>> I don't think that this patch would effect the RESTfull behaviour in >>> any >>> >>> way. Its just that the user needs to be extra carefull if he wants to >>> use >>> >>> RESTfull services in cunjunction with the hierarchical services >>> concept. i.e >>> >>> if he has a services called foo do not use foo as a top level folder >>> in your >>> >>> hierarchy. Its simple as that. I guess been careful is the price you >>> have to >>> >>> pay if you wanna use hierarchical services. >>> >>> >>> >>> I like the idea of having hierarchical services in Axis2. Well I did >>> it >>> >>> once using the extension points of Axis2 but I'm +1 for having this >>> concept >>> >>> baked into Axis2. >>> >>> >>> >>> Also it would be good to base arguments on facts rather than >>> religious >>> >>> beleifs. Quite a few design desicions made back then when Axis2 was >>> designed >>> >>> did not take stuff such as this into consideration. Well i'm not >>> blaming the >>> >>> initial Axis2 community for that. As the project evolves new features >>> such >>> >>> as this can be added. Good examples are features such as plugable >>> message >>> >>> builders/formatters (post 1.1), custom deployers (post 1.2 IIRC), the >>> >>> binding hierarchy concept (post 1.3) are features that were added >>> later in >>> >>> the cycle. I see the hierarchical service deployment feature as just >>> another >>> >>> addition to the wide variety of features of Axis2. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Keith. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Sanjiva Weerawarana >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> I forgot to address the issue with not being able to support RESTful >>> >>>> services. I think we can- we just need to change the REST dispatcher >>> (argh >>> >>>> if that's what its called its a terrible name!) to look at the >>> context path >>> >>>> of the service(s) and try filtering those out first. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Sanjiva. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 8:51 PM, Sanjiva Weerawarana >>> >>>> wrote: >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Deepal, I've read this entire thread and I'm confused as to why >>> you're >>> >>>>> objecting. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> First of all, I think Isuru sent this thread into a bad start by >>> using >>> >>>>> versioning as the reason for wanting to introduce hierarchical >>> service >>> >>>>> deployment. That was a mistake but as Andreas' comment pointed out, >>> this is >>> >>>>> nothing more than the contextPath concept found in Java containers. >>> >>>>> Versioning is at most a special case but let's just take that out >>> of the >>> >>>>> discussion because this is not about versioning. If you disagree >>> please >>> >>>>> explain why. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Secondly, this can be done outside of Axis2 totally. All we need to >>> do >>> >>>>> is write a new deployer and a dispatcher. There's no need to waste >>> time with >>> >>>>> this type of pretty un-objective / emotional debate. However, it >>> was >>> >>>>> proposed as a mod to axis2 because it significantly improves axis2 >>> usability >>> >>>>> WITHOUT breaking any existing behavior. Or so was the belief. So >>> let's go >>> >>>>> thru the discussion and if the view is that this is not necessary >>> in axis2's >>> >>>>> default deployers etc. then no problem. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Now I will explain why this approach is better than alternatives. >>> The >>> >>>>> basic requirement is that having a single flat naming scheme for >>> services is >>> >>>>> unnecessarily limiting. Why? Because it requires everyone to agree >>> on the >>> >>>>> service name as those names are global. If you're using Axis2 as a >>> library >>> >>>>> on a single developer machine that's not an issue. However, if you >>> want to >>> >>>>> deploy an axis2 engine to host some number of services for a larger >>> >>>>> organization then that invariably results in name conflicts. I >>> assume you >>> >>>>> agree that's global names are a limitation. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> How do you fix it? One option is to use some naming convention like >>> >>>>> what Java packages did for Java classes. So you can have >>> >>>>> /services/us.finance.address and /uk.services/marketing.address if >>> (say) US >>> >>>>> finance and UK marketing orgs both want to have a service called >>> "address". >>> >>>>> That basically makes the fact that what you have are hierarchically >>> named >>> >>>>> services opaque to the Web infrastructure. For example, if you were >>> >>>>> analyzing http logs to see the traffic you can't get a simple >>> answer to "how >>> >>>>> many times have UK guys' services been used?". That's *exactly* the >>> kind of >>> >>>>> wrong-headed thinking that got WS-* in trouble with the REST guys >>> for >>> >>>>> improper use of REST (and I'm absolutely one of the early culprits >>> who made >>> >>>>> the mistake). >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Another approach is to have a way to specify the context path in >>> the >>> >>>>> service itself. If you remember, we used to have the concept of >>> service name >>> >>>>> you could specify in service.xml itself (maybe its still there; I >>> have no >>> >>>>> idea) - the idea was it would override the .aar file name if thats' >>> there. >>> >>>>> This is similar- you can have in foo.aar a setting saying >>> >>>>> contextPath="finance/foo" and that means that's where the service >>> is >>> >>>>> deployed. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> The advantage of simply using the file system hierarchy to compute >>> that >>> >>>>> is just simplicity. The context hierarchy is visible to everyone by >>> simply >>> >>>>> looking at the directory structure. If you check in the repository >>> into SVN >>> >>>>> (which I know a bunch of people do) it gives a simple way to manage >>> >>>>> authorization for deployment for different people. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> I actually think we should support a contextPath=xxx option in >>> >>>>> services.xml as well. However, treating the file system hierarchy >>> as a >>> >>>>> hierarchy is, you know, rather natural. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> I think Isuru has shown that there is no extra performance loss or >>> any >>> >>>>> other loss by supporting hierachically deployed services. You DON'T >>> need to >>> >>>>> use them unless you want to of course - and if there's no hierarchy >>> there's >>> >>>>> no change at all (subject to having enough unit tests to make sure >>> that old >>> >>>>> and new behavior for the old feature is not changed). >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Sanjiva. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 7:05 PM, Deepal jayasinghe < >>> deepalk@gmail.com> >>> >>>>> wrote: >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Andreas Veithen >>> >>>>>> > > >>> >>>>>> > wrote: >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > Guys, >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > Are we actually discussing the right question? Looking at >>> the >>> >>>>>> > patch >>> >>>>>> > proposed by Isuru, I have the impression that versioning is >>> >>>>>> > merely one >>> >>>>>> > use case, but that (in contrast to modules) the code doesn't >>> >>>>>> > make any >>> >>>>>> > assumption about the meaning of the hierarchy in the >>> repository >>> >>>>>> > (it >>> >>>>>> > could be version number, but it could also something >>> completely >>> >>>>>> > different). Fundamentally the change is not about >>> versioning, >>> >>>>>> > but >>> >>>>>> > about giving the user the possibility to define the >>> structure of >>> >>>>>> > the >>> >>>>>> > endpoint URL. >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > yes. this should be the idea. it is to support hierarchical >>> service >>> >>>>>> > folder structure to mange >>> >>>>>> > services. Versioning is only one possible use case. >>> >>>>>> > I think this is a common requirement. For an example if we take >>> a >>> >>>>>> > web >>> >>>>>> > site people don't put >>> >>>>>> > all their .jsp or .html files in the root directory. They manage >>> >>>>>> > them >>> >>>>>> > in a some meaningful >>> >>>>>> > folder structure and even page url maps to it. >>> >>>>>> You are mistaken in the case of web site .jsp files are like >>> .class >>> >>>>>> files. So even in Web Service we have package hierarchy. >>> >>>>>> > I can hardly think of any reason for opposing to introduce such >>> >>>>>> > feature to axis2 service deployment provided >>> >>>>>> > that it *does not break existing functionality*. >>> >>>>>> If you look at the directory structure (as I told you before) >>> >>>>>> information repeat it self. It is analogous to "Shop is closed >>> because >>> >>>>>> it is not open". >>> >>>>>> Just because feature X is good in project Y, we should not >>> introduce >>> >>>>>> that to Axis2. >>> >>>>>> If you or someone want to do such a feature of course they can do >>> >>>>>> that, >>> >>>>>> just ad a new deployer to handle the they want, even in you case >>> we >>> >>>>>> can >>> >>>>>> do the same. Let's create a new deployer and manage anyway you >>> like, >>> >>>>>> and >>> >>>>>> then if you think it is ok, then commit the new deployer to Axis2. >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> However I am not ok with introducing new URL pattern, I think >>> Isuru >>> >>>>>> already agreed to replace "/" with "-" >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > Deepal, >>> >>>>>> > I feel you have given over weight to the versioning support >>> which is >>> >>>>>> > a >>> >>>>>> > use case of this. In the way to have told >>> >>>>>> > people can have versioning without any support of axis2, by just >>> >>>>>> > naming service in the way they need. >>> >>>>>> Yes. At the end of the day whether it is "/" or "-" would become a >>> >>>>>> unique name. So it is the service name. >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > Comming into the other point of probable break of existing >>> >>>>>> > functionality Can you please come up with the >>> >>>>>> > set of use case scenarios for this? Then we can ask Isuru to >>> provide >>> >>>>>> > integration test for all these scenarios. This may test the >>> existing >>> >>>>>> > functionality as well :) >>> >>>>>> I am sorry I do not have time to comeup with scenarios when >>> someone >>> >>>>>> add >>> >>>>>> new features, specially even without going through the existing >>> JIRA. >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > I think we should not be pessimistic and think deployment engine >>> is >>> >>>>>> > done for ever and any change will break it. >>> >>>>>> Not at all, how many changes we made, in this case my concern is >>> not >>> >>>>>> the >>> >>>>>> deployment engine it is the URL pattern. >>> >>>>>> > >>> >>>>>> > Isuru, >>> >>>>>> > Please provide a set of integration tests for the scenarios >>> >>>>>> > mentioned. >>> >>>>>> :) >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>> >>>>>> Deepal >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> -- >>> >>>>> Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D. >>> >>>>> Founder, Director & Chief Scientist; Lanka Software Foundation; >>> >>>>> http://www.opensource.lk/ >>> >>>>> Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/ >>> >>>>> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/ >>> >>>>> Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; >>> http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/ >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/ >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> -- >>> >>>> Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D. >>> >>>> Founder, Director & Chief Scientist; Lanka Software Foundation; >>> >>>> http://www.opensource.lk/ >>> >>>> Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/ >>> >>>> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/ >>> >>>> Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; >>> http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/ >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Keith Chapman >>> >>> >>> >>> blog: http://www.keith-chapman.org >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> -- >>> >> Senior Software Engineer, >>> >> WSO2 Inc. http://wso2.org/ >>> >> Blog : http://isurues.wordpress.com/ >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Paul Fremantle >>> Co-Founder and CTO, WSO2 >>> Apache Synapse PMC Chair >>> OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair >>> >>> blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org >>> paul@wso2.com >>> >>> "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com >>> >> >> > > > -- > Amila Suriarachchi > WSO2 Inc. > blog: http://amilachinthaka.blogspot.com/ > --000e0cd24ea0abf4120472ba3d56 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Amila Suriarach= chi <am= ilasuriarachchi@gmail.com> wrote:


On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Chinmoy Chakraborty <cch= inu@gmail.com> wrote:
Paul,
=A0
May be I dropped in from nowhere but I like to understand the idea. Wh= at is the purpose of maintaining duplicate data by allowing exact same AAR = to be deployed in two different parts of hierarchy?
It is not exact AAR file. It is basically organise your AAR file in a = directory structure without putting all of the in the root directory.
eg.
repository/services/admin/AdminService.aar
repository/services/= management/Management.aar
repository/services/tech/v1.1/Tech.aar
repository/services/tech/v1.0/Tec= h.aar

if you take latter two cases, it may be two versions of same .= aar file which user wants to active at the same time.
=A0
CHINMOY>> OK.
=A0

=A0
I guess Axis2 should also support same service name with different nam= espaces. I have this kind of requirement in our project but right now it= 9;s a limitation.
if you can describe your requirement then we can see how it can be sup= ported.

As I understood what you want to have is same service name w= ith different name spaces to distinguish the version.
(I assume version = depends on the namespace in your case)
=A0
CHINMOY>> Not exactly. I have two different services with same s= ervice name and they do absolutely two different tasks. let me explain: I h= ave one function called ABS (returns absolut= e value, generally long) and a routine calle= d ABS (does some other work than ABS function). Let's say the namespace= for ABS function is abc.function.ABS and th= e namespace for ABS routine is abc.routine.ABS.
=A0
So we can have two different services for the same service name. In AX= IS 1.x we could do that since there was concept of jws deployment and the d= irectory structure was part of the url.

Now the problem is what is the epr for these = two services. In the above solution epr is mapped to the folder structure. = So people can invoke two services with different eprs.

In your solut= ion how to determine the service to invoke once a request receive?
=A0
CHINMOY>> If we have a parameter in services.xml like <servic= eNameSpace>abc.function/routine</serviceNameSpace> then in the url= the service name should be appened with namespace. e.g
=A0
../services/ABS (now)
../service/abc.function.ABS
=A0
The logic should be just add namespace along with the servicename and = the namespace is available from the services.xml.
=A0
Chinmoy

thanks,
Amila.
=
=A0
Chinmoy
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Paul Fremantle <= span dir=3D"ltr"><= pzfreo@gmail.com> wrote:
Chinmoy

I thi= nk that is cool, but I guess the aim of Isuru's initial proposal
was= to allow the exact same AAR to be deployed independently in two
parts of the hierarchy. To me that is a good objective.

Paul

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Chinmoy Chakraborty<cchinu@gmail.com> wrote:=
> Guys,
>
> How=A0about=A0introducing a new parameter (e= .g ServiceClassNameSpace) in the
> services.xml to support directory hierarchy in the service?
>> Chinmoy
>
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Isuru Suriara= chchi <isurues@gm= ail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As usin= g '/' character may cause problems in dispatching, I just used a>> separate character ('!') to represent the directory hiera= rchy in the
>> service. This allows all types of services to be deployed hierarch= ically
>> without any problems (Including RESTful services).
&g= t;>
>> Ex: if we deploy the Echo service at
>> /reposi= tory/services/foo/bar/1.0.0/echo.aar, service name will be
>> foo!bar!1.0.0!Echo and the EPR will be like
>> ../axis2/s= ervices/foo!bar!1.0.0!Echo/echoString
>>
>> I've atta= ched a new patch to the JIRA
>> (https://issues.apache.org/jir= a/browse/AXIS2-4479). This patch doesn't
>> contain any changes in dispatching logics. And also I've imple= mented the
>> ability to deploy JAXWS, Pojo etc.. (which are comin= g from the axis2.xml)
>> services hierarchically to make this effo= rt complete. In addition to that,
>> I've written some deployment tests for hierarchical services.<= br>>>
>> Thanks,
>> ~Isuru
>>
>> = On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 2:48 AM, keith chapman <keithgchapman@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I've been out of touch = with the Axis2 list for some time. Took a while to
>>> read thi= s thread. Just a few thouths on it.
>>>
>>> I don&#= 39;t think that this patch would effect the RESTfull behaviour in any
>>> way. Its just that the user needs to be extra carefull if he w= ants to use
>>> RESTfull services in cunjunction with the hiera= rchical services concept. i.e
>>> if he has a services called f= oo do not use foo as a top level folder in your
>>> hierarchy. Its simple as that. I guess been careful is the pri= ce you have to
>>> pay if you wanna use hierarchical services.<= br>>>>
>>> I like the idea of having hierarchical serv= ices in Axis2. Well I did it
>>> once using the extension points of Axis2 but I'm +1 for ha= ving this concept
>>> baked into Axis2.
>>>
>= >> Also it would be good to base arguments on facts rather than relig= ious
>>> beleifs. Quite a few design desicions made back then when Axis= 2 was designed
>>> did not take stuff such as this into conside= ration. Well i'm not blaming the
>>> initial Axis2 communit= y for that. As the project evolves new features such
>>> as this can be added. Good examples are features such as pluga= ble message
>>> builders/formatters (post 1.1), custom deployer= s (post 1.2 IIRC), the
>>> binding hierarchy concept (post 1.3)= are features that were added later in
>>> the cycle. I see the hierarchical service deployment feature a= s just another
>>> addition to the wide variety of features of = Axis2.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Keith.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Sanjiva Weera= warana
>>> <sanjiva@opensource.lk> wrote:
>>>>
>= ;>>> I forgot to address the issue with not being able to support = RESTful
>>>> services. I think we can- we just need to change the REST = dispatcher (argh
>>>> if that's what its called its a te= rrible name!) to look at the context path
>>>> of the servic= e(s) and try filtering those out first.
>>>>
>>>> Sanjiva.
>>>>
>&g= t;>> On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 8:51 PM, Sanjiva Weerawarana
>>= >> <san= jiva@opensource.lk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Deepal, I've read this ent= ire thread and I'm confused as to why you're
>>>>>= ; objecting.
>>>>>
>>>>> First of all, = I think Isuru sent this thread into a bad start by using
>>>>> versioning as the reason for wanting to introduce hier= archical service
>>>>> deployment. That was a mistake but= as Andreas' comment pointed out, this is
>>>>> nothi= ng more than the contextPath concept found in Java containers.
>>>>> Versioning is at most a special case but let's jus= t take that out of the
>>>>> discussion because this is n= ot about versioning. If you disagree please
>>>>> explain= why.
>>>>>
>>>>> Secondly, this can be done out= side of Axis2 totally. All we need to do
>>>>> is write a= new deployer and a dispatcher. There's no need to waste time with
>>>>> this type of pretty un-objective / emotional debate. H= owever, it was
>>>>> proposed as a mod to axis2 because i= t significantly improves axis2 usability
>>>>> WITHOUT br= eaking any existing behavior. Or so was the belief. So let's go
>>>>> thru the discussion and if the view is that this is no= t necessary in axis2's
>>>>> default deployers etc. t= hen no problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now I will = explain why this approach is better than alternatives. The
>>>>> basic requirement is that having a single flat naming = scheme for services is
>>>>> unnecessarily limiting. Why?= Because it requires everyone to agree on the
>>>>> servi= ce name as those names are global. If you're using Axis2 as a library >>>>> on a single developer machine that's not an issue.= However, if you want to
>>>>> deploy an axis2 engine to = host some number of services for a larger
>>>>> organizat= ion then that invariably results in name conflicts. I assume you
>>>>> agree that's global names are a limitation.
>= ;>>>>
>>>>> How do you fix it? One option is = to use some naming convention like
>>>>> what Java packag= es did for Java classes. So you can have
>>>>> /services/us.finance.address and /uk.services/marketin= g.address if (say) US
>>>>> finance and UK marketing orgs= both want to have a service called "address".
>>>>= ;> That basically makes the fact that what you have are hierarchically n= amed
>>>>> services opaque to the Web infrastructure. For example= , if you were
>>>>> analyzing http logs to see the traffi= c you can't get a simple answer to "how
>>>>> ma= ny times have UK guys' services been used?". That's *exactly* = the kind of
>>>>> wrong-headed thinking that got WS-* in trouble with th= e REST guys for
>>>>> improper use of REST (and I'm a= bsolutely one of the early culprits who made
>>>>> the mi= stake).
>>>>>
>>>>> Another approach is to have a = way to specify the context path in the
>>>>> service itse= lf. If you remember, we used to have the concept of service name
>>= ;>>> you could specify in service.xml itself (maybe its still ther= e; I have no
>>>>> idea) - the idea was it would override the .aar file n= ame if thats' there.
>>>>> This is similar- you can h= ave in foo.aar a setting saying
>>>>> contextPath=3D"= ;finance/foo" and that means that's where the service is
>>>>> deployed.
>>>>>
>>>>&= gt; The advantage of simply using the file system hierarchy to compute that=
>>>>> is just simplicity. The context hierarchy is visib= le to everyone by simply
>>>>> looking at the directory structure. If you check in th= e repository into SVN
>>>>> (which I know a bunch of peop= le do) it gives a simple way to manage
>>>>> authorizatio= n for deployment for different people.
>>>>>
>>>>> I actually think we should sup= port a contextPath=3Dxxx option in
>>>>> services.xml as = well. However, treating the file system hierarchy as a
>>>>&= gt; hierarchy is, you know, rather natural.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think Isuru has shown that t= here is no extra performance loss or any
>>>>> other loss= by supporting hierachically deployed services. You DON'T need to
>>>>> use them unless you want to of course - and if there&#= 39;s no hierarchy there's
>>>>> no change at all (sub= ject to having enough unit tests to make sure that old
>>>>&= gt; and new behavior for the old feature is not changed).
>>>>>
>>>>> Sanjiva.
>>>>&g= t;
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 7:05 PM, Deepal jayasing= he <deepalk@gmail= .com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>= >> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> = > On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Andreas Veithen
>>>>&g= t;> > <andreas.veithen@gmail.com <mailto:andreas.veithen@gmail.com>>
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>> >
&g= t;>>>>> > =A0 =A0 Guys,
>>>>>> ><= br>>>>>>> > =A0 =A0 Are we actually discussing the rig= ht question? Looking at the
>>>>>> > patch
>>>>>> > =A0 = =A0 proposed by Isuru, I have the impression that versioning is
>>= >>>> > merely one
>>>>>> > =A0 =A0 u= se case, but that (in contrast to modules) the code doesn't
>>>>>> > make any
>>>>>> > =A0= =A0 assumption about the meaning of the hierarchy in the repository
>= ;>>>>> > (it
>>>>>> > =A0 =A0 cou= ld be version number, but it could also something completely
>>>>>> > =A0 =A0 different). Fundamentally the change = is not about versioning,
>>>>>> > but
>>&g= t;>>> > =A0 =A0 about giving the user the possibility to define= the structure of
>>>>>> > the
>>>>>> > =A0 =A0 = endpoint URL.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> = >
>>>>>> > yes. this should be the idea. it is t= o support hierarchical service
>>>>>> > folder structure to mange
>>>>= >> > services. Versioning is only one possible use case.
>&g= t;>>>> > I think this is a common requirement. For an exampl= e if we take a
>>>>>> > web
>>>>>> > site peo= ple don't put
>>>>>> > all their .jsp or .html = files in the root directory. They manage
>>>>>> > t= hem
>>>>>> > in a some meaningful
>>>>>&= gt; > folder structure and even page url maps to it.
>>>>= >> You are mistaken in the case of web site .jsp files are like .clas= s
>>>>>> files. So even in Web Service we have package hier= archy.
>>>>>> > I can hardly think of any reason fo= r opposing to introduce such
>>>>>> > feature to ax= is2 service deployment provided
>>>>>> > that it *does not break existing functionalit= y*.
>>>>>> If you look at the directory structure (as = I told you before)
>>>>>> information repeat it self. = It is analogous to "Shop is closed because
>>>>>> it is not open".
>>>>>> = Just because feature X is good in project Y, we should not introduce
>= ;>>>>> that to Axis2.
>>>>>> If you or = someone want to do such a feature of course they can do
>>>>>> that,
>>>>>> just ad a new de= ployer =A0to handle the they want, even in you case we
>>>>&= gt;> can
>>>>>> do the same. Let's create a new= deployer and manage anyway you like,
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> then if you think = it is ok, then commit the new deployer to Axis2.
>>>>>>= ;
>>>>>> However I am not ok with introducing new URL = pattern, I think Isuru
>>>>>> already agreed to replace "/" with "= ;-"
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > = Deepal,
>>>>>> > I feel you have given over weight = to the versioning support which is
>>>>>> > a
>>>>>> > use case o= f this. In the way to have told
>>>>>> > people can= have versioning without any support of axis2, by just
>>>>&= gt;> > naming service in the way they need.
>>>>>> Yes. At the end of the day whether it is "/&q= uot; or "-" would become a
>>>>>> unique nam= e. So it is the service name.
>>>>>> >
>>&= gt;>>> > Comming into the other point of probable break of exis= ting
>>>>>> > functionality Can you please come up with the=
>>>>>> > set of use case scenarios for this? Then = we can ask Isuru to provide
>>>>>> > integration te= st for all these scenarios. This may test the existing
>>>>>> > functionality as well :)
>>>>&= gt;> I am sorry I do not have time to comeup with scenarios when someone=
>>>>>> add
>>>>>> new features, = specially even without going through the existing JIRA.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I think we s= hould not be pessimistic and think deployment engine is
>>>>= >> > done for ever and any change will break it.
>>>&g= t;>> Not at all, how many changes we made, in this case my concern is= not
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> deployment engine = it is the URL pattern.
>>>>>> >
>>>>= >> > Isuru,
>>>>>> > Please provide a set = of integration tests for the scenarios
>>>>>> > mentioned.
>>>>>> :)
= >>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>= ;>>> Deepal
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> San= jiva Weerawarana, Ph.D.
>>>>> Founder, Director & Chi= ef Scientist; Lanka Software Foundation;
>>>>> http://www.opensource.lk/=
>>>>> Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/
>>&= gt;>> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
>>>>> Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/<= br>>>>>>
>>>>> Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>= ; --
>>>> Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D.
>>>> Fou= nder, Director & Chief Scientist; Lanka Software Foundation;
>>= ;>> http://ww= w.opensource.lk/
>>>> Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/
>>>&= gt; Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
>>>> Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/
&= gt;>>>
>>>> Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>= > Keith Chapman
>>>
>>> blog: http://www.keith-chapman.org<= br> >>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Senior Software= Engineer,
>> WSO2 Inc. http://wso2.org/
>> Blog : http://isurues.wordpress.com/
>
>



--
Paul Fremantle
Co-Founder = and CTO, WSO2
Apache Synapse PMC Chair
OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
blog: http://pzf.f= remantle.org
paul@wso2.com
"Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com




--
Amila Suriarachchi
WSO2 Inc.
blog: http://amilach= inthaka.blogspot.com/

--000e0cd24ea0abf4120472ba3d56--