ws-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Lawrence Mandel <>
Subject Re: [WODEN] Future of Woden Axiom implementation ?
Date Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:36:14 GMT
Hi Sagara,

If you're correct that there are no current consumers of the Axiom impl of
Woden I think your proposal makes good sense. Best to focus the efforts of
the small number of active contributors on a code base that sees usage.


On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Sagara Gunathunga <> wrote:

> 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 !
> --
> Sagara Gunathunga
> Blog      -
> Web      -
> LinkedIn -
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message