ws-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Gainty <mgai...@hotmail.com>
Subject RE: [WODEN] Future of Woden Axiom implementation ?
Date Mon, 25 Jun 2012 18:32:15 GMT

 if DOM version delivers the same functionality as WODEN then i agree with larry..further
AXIOM development should implement DOM (and deprecate woden)
 unless of course someone wants to fork the woden implementation!

Thanks,
Martin 
______________________________________________ 
Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité

Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene Empfaenger sein, so bitten
wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist
unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet
keine rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von E-Mails koennen
wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.
Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire
prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez l'expéditeur. N'importe
quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information
seulement et n'aura pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les
email peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune
responsabilité pour le contenu fourni.


> From: sagara.gunathunga@gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 10:56:32 +0530
> Subject: Re: [WODEN] Future of Woden Axiom implementation ?
> To: dev@ws.apache.org
> 
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 5:10 AM, Martin Gainty <mgainty@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Ive have extensively implemented DOM4j based Axiom specifically:
> >
> >  <groupId>org.apache.ws.commons.axiom</groupId>
> >     <artifactId>axiom</artifactId>
> >     <name>Axiom</name>
> >     <version>1.2.9-SNAPSHOT</version>
> >
> >
> > I have'nt seen any matrix detailing the capabilities of axiom-woden vs
> > axiom-dom4j so I cannot say dropping woden would impact future Axiom
> > implementations
> > but it does seem like a duplication of effort to support both OM
> > implementations
> >
> > Is there a matrix available to illustrate features and
> > functions capabilities of axiom-woden vs axiom-dom4j?
> 
> Please note that there is no DOM4J implementation available for
> Woden-API it's W3C DOM implementation for Woden-API. Functionality
> wise both implementations are more or less same but there is no matrix
> available.
> 
> Thanks !
> 
> 
> > Martin
> > ------------------------------------
> > Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene
> > Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte
> > Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht
> > dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine
> > rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von
> > E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.
> >
> >
> >
> >> Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 14:12:38 -0400
> >> From: deepalk@gmail.com
> >> To: dev@ws.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: [WODEN] Future of Woden Axiom implementation ?
> >
> >>
> >> What is the status of WSDL 2.0 ? how many WS stacks use WSDL 2.0 ?.
> >>
> >> Deepal
> >> > Hi Devs,
> >> >
> >> > I'm thinking about future of Axiom (OM) based implementation of Woden
> >> > API for sometime, whether we should continue or drop support from next
> >> > release ?
> >> >
> >> > AFAIK original objective of OM implementation is to support Axis2 but
> >> > in fact Axis2 never used OM implementation instead Axis2 still use DOM
> >> > based implementation. Also in my POV there is no such drawbacks with
> >> > DOM implementation to move Axis2 to use OM implementation. At the
> >> > moment there is no clear indication about users of OM implementation
> >> > too. In this situation it is kind of a overhead to maintain OM
> >> > implementation further specially with small number of developers. At
> >> > the beginning Woden had plans for number of cool features such as
> >> > supporting to both WSDL versions etc, but all original developers have
> >> > been disappeared from the community few years ago hence it's seem OK
> >> > to re-prioritize objectives based on current requirements and
> >> > resources.
> >> >
> >> > This also important decision to reduce complexities among Woden
> >> > artifacts, at the moment it's required to have at least 3 JAR files
> >> > to use Woden framework as woden-api, woden-impl-common and
> >> > woden-impl-dom/woden-impl-om. Dropping OM implementation allows to
> >> > merge these artifacts and deliver above 3 module as a single JAR file
> >> > called woden.jar. IMO this kind of single artifact deliverables are
> >> > more natural for utility projects and easy to deploy on OGSI
> >> > containers too.
> >> >
> >> > Personally I don't have energy to maintain both implementations, also
> >> > without actual users no point to maintain OM implementation further.
> >> > Based on above facts I would like to suggest terminate OM support from
> >> > next release and move forward the project with what ever the useful
> >> > features.
> >> >
> >> > Any thoughts ?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Thanks !
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ws.apache.org
> >>
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Sagara Gunathunga
> 
> Blog      - http://ssagara.blogspot.com
> Web      - http://people.apache.org/~sagara/
> LinkedIn - http://www.linkedin.com/in/ssagara
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ws.apache.org
> 
 		 	   		  
Mime
View raw message