incubator-stonehenge-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Dewey <Ben.De...@26ny.com>
Subject RE: Config Service interoperability
Date Tue, 14 Jul 2009 21:38:24 GMT
> Ben, if I add the action = getBSConfig - this means that any program calling this needs
to use getBSConfig rather than GetBSConfig? Even those within .NET??

ASFAIK, the .NET calls will use proxies generated from the interface which will use the GetBSConfig
(i.e. no .NET code changes).  In all cases the actual web service call will contain an action
attribute of getBSConfig.

-Ben


-----Original Message-----
From: Avantika Agrawal [mailto:t-avagra@microsoft.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 2:28 PM
To: stonehenge-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: Config Service interoperability

I actually had RUBY and SPRING in the database and then removed them because they weren't
being used. I can easily modify the script to insert them.

Apart from the naming inconsistencies, there is an additional attribute for BSConfigResponse
and OPSConfigResponse in the DataContract of the .NET - BSName and OPSName. Is this something
that the PHP folks wish to use? I added that while I was cleaning up the Utility.cs class
and I think it is a useful attribute.

Ben, if I add the action = getBSConfig - this means that any program calling this needs to
use getBSConfig rather than GetBSConfig? Even those within .NET??

-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Dewey [mailto:Ben.Dewey@26ny.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 6:10 AM
To: stonehenge-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: Config Service interoperability

ASFAIK, the RUBY_BS and OPS were created by WSO2 that's why they're supported by PHP/WSAS.
 Unfortunately Ruby is still in contrib and hasn't had the traction to make it into the trunk.

That being said, I don't think that the RUBY (or SPRING for that matter) should be in the
trunk.

Additionally, any Ruby developers out there who want to evaluate the validity of the Ruby
implementation in contrib, please do.  Also anyone on the list who knows any Ruby developers
who may be interested please encourage them to join the list and speak up.

-Ben Dewey

________________________________________
From: Ming Jin [skyairmj@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 5:23 AM
To: stonehenge-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Config Service interoperability

Thanks, Ben, that would be great.

There is one more thing, it's about the available options for client/bs/ops in config_service.
Now .NET and PHP support different options. For example, .NET supports JAVA_CLIENT/DOTNET_CLIENT/PHP_CLIENT,
while php supports JAVA_CLIENT/DOTNET_CLIENT/PHP_CLIENT/RUBY_CLIENT. In addition, same things
happen in the options of BS and OPS.

Can we make them consistent in that aspect?


On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Ben Dewey <Ben.Dewey@26ny.com> wrote:

> Avantika,
>
> Let's get these discrepancies addressed and change the contract names
> so the Metro team can model their config contract after the .NET contract.
>
> You should be able to change the method name to match PHP by adding
> the action parameter to the OperationContract like this.
>
> [OperationContract]
> BSConfigResponse GetBSConfig(BSConfigRequest bs);
>
> To
>
> [OperationContract(Action="getBSConfig")]
> BSConfigResponse GetBSConfig(BSConfigRequest bs);
>
>
> -Ben Dewey
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Avantika Agrawal [mailto:t-avagra@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 3:29 PM
> To: stonehenge-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Config Service interoperability
>
> I just tested this and it managed to make a connection to the
> configuration service but was unable to process the GetBSConfig
> method. I think that's because our contract specifies this as
> GetBSConfig and theirs is getBSConfig. This can be changed pretty
> easily. But the contracts are a little different so all the
> inconsistencies should be ironed out. Is this something you're interested in?
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Ben Dewey [Ben.Dewey@26ny.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 10:45 AM
> To: 'stonehenge-dev@incubator.apache.org'
> Subject: RE: Config Service interoperability
>
> You should be able to just update the config service endpoint
> configuration address to use
>
> http://localhost:8080/php_stocktrader/config_service/config_svc.php
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Avantika Agrawal [mailto:t-avagra@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 1:35 PM
> To: stonehenge-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Config Service interoperability
>
> I have not actually tried this. I am interested in testing that but
> I'm not sure how to go about it?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Dewey [mailto:Ben.Dewey@26ny.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 8:51 AM
> To: 'stonehenge-dev@incubator.apache.org'
> Subject: Config Service interoperability
>
> Avantika,
>
> Although this wasn't the goal,  have you by any chance tested
> interoperability between the .NET and PHP config services?  Does that work?
>
> -Ben Dewey
>



--
Ming Jin

Consultant
Thoughtworks, Inc
Mobile: +86 135-2125-6300
Email: skyairmj@gmail.com
MSN: skyairmj@hotmail.com
Blog:  http://blogjava.net/mingj

Mime
View raw message