synapse-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hubert, Eric" <>
Subject RE: Synapse configuration namespace
Date Sun, 21 Nov 2010 15:52:06 GMT
Well, I think I have to agree with Sanjiva’s statement about the meaning of namespaces for
an end user. I also do not know many people really caring about namespaces as long as those
namespaces are not causing any troubles. Maybe one should not look at a namespace change independent
of other changes.

If for whatever reason a configuration format and/or syntax has changed resulting in the possibility
that some or even all the user’s configurations will no longer work with a newer software
version and users receive a migration tool to convert their configurations using the old format
into a new format, users also do not care whether there is a namespace change or not (as long
as the migration tool works properly).
API changes breaking existing custom extensions (in the case of Synapse primarily “mediators”)
or (even more critical) changed runtime behaviour should normally affect end users much more.
During the too long time without any release since the last release of Synapse in June 2008
(so about two and a half years ago) I’m pretty sure any of the above will be the case.

From: Supun Kamburugamuva []
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2010 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: Synapse configuration namespace

I'm +1 for a namespace change if we have changed the semantics of the synapse configuration
language at a broader level. But since we haven't done any major change to the configuration
language im 0 on this. So my opinion solely depend on what users will think and how they will
get affected.

On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 7:35 AM, Ruwan Linton <<>>
I found more incompatible changes :-(

I do not understand why you are opposing to changing the namespace with 2.0 release, while
we have this sort of dangerous incompatibilities.


On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 6:43 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana <<>>
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Ruwan Linton <<>>
Also, in general using namespaces to version XML schemas is generally considered bad practice.

I don't think we are doing a versioning of the synapse configuration schema with the namespace,
anyway most of

Then what are you achieving with the namespace name change?

the other schemas, like (WSDL, XSLT) have different namespaces for different versions. :-(

Not correct .. WSDL 1.1 to 2.0 does do but in that case the languages and semantics are majorly
different. The 2.0 language was also delivered by a whole different group instead of a small
private club.

XSLT was intentionally, carefully designed for "forwards compatibility" and has a "version"

<>This was a James Clark masterpiece.

Now see XSLT 2.0's section on backwards compatibility:
Also there is more than the domain name or being a new TLP out from WS for this namespace
change, which is, that Synapse is more than web services and it can handle many things apart
from web services, as you know web services is just one connector among many other connectors
for mediation, and that is why I do not want to limit the namespace to the<>.

Yes Synapse is much more than Web services. However, IMO, most users don't bother to give
any quality time to looking at the namespace and making judgments based on that.

I'm done pushing my position on this topic :).

Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D.
Founder, Director & Chief Scientist; Lanka Software Foundation;
Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2;
Founder & Director; Thinkcube Systems;
Member; Apache Software Foundation;
Member; Sahana Software Foundation;
Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa;


Ruwan Linton
Software Architect & Product Manager, WSO2 ESB;
WSO2 Inc.;

Lean . Enterprise . Middleware

phone: +1 408 754 7388 ext 51789
email:<>; cell: +94 77 341 3097

Technical Lead, WSO2 Inc<>

View raw message