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 Sun, 24 Jun 2012 23:40:16 GMT

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 implementationsbut 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?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
> 
 		 	   		  
Mime
View raw message