axis-c-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Samisa Abeysinghe <samisa.abeysin...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: 1.5 Release
Date Wed, 23 Mar 2005 03:32:05 GMT
Dims,
      I had a look into how the problem could be fixed for Goole API.
As we discussed in the other thread, this is a problem with the
"assumtion" on the XML element ordering. Now to fix this, we have to
fix SoapDeSerializer class (earlier I thought it is the parser, but it
happens to be SoapSeSerializer). We have to buffer the AnyElement
returned by the parser at the SoapDeSerializer level if the
m_pchNameOrValue not what is requested by the generated code and go on
looking for next nodes. This obviously is a major change, looking at
the number of methids using the parser next() methid in
SoapDeSerializer. And ofcource, I *think* this would work, but we have
to verify. It will take couple of days to update the code. However it
will take much more time to test and fix for side effects.
     May be we could have looked into public APIs like these earlier.
However, if we are to fix this and release, it will take another month
or so for the code to stabilize. And those who want to use 1.5 for
client engagements, would not like idea of changing a sensitive class
as SoapDeSerializer at this moment.
     What if we do release 1.5 as it is and include this to 1.6?
Thanks,
Samisa...

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:33:01 -0500, Davanum Srinivas <davanum@gmail.com> wrote:
> John,
> 
> I have been playing with the code...I was thinking what is the use of
> making a release if people can't use it to access public web services
> like Amazon, Google, TerraService and eBay? Can we spend some time to
> make our code robust and useful in the real world out-of-the-box? (I
> can definitely confirm that the code genned out of the box does not
> work with Google Search API for starters)
> 
> Thanks,
> dims
> 
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 18:29:04 +0000, John Hawkins <hawkinsj@uk.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > I think we should go for a 1.5 release which is client biased next wk.
> >
> > The server will still work but may have issues.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  "Carsten Blecken" <cblecken@macrovision.com>
> >
> > 22/03/2005 18:15
> >
> > Please respond to
> >  "Apache AXIS C Developers List"
> >
> >
> > To "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org>
> >
> > cc
> >
> > Subject RE: 1.5 Release
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >  sorry for the late reply. Maybe a beta could help to get the
> >  client side improvements out. Certainly worth considering,
> >  IMO.
> >
> >  It is not that the server side is not important, but I do have
> >  some concerns about the current server side approach (There is an
> >  interesting writeup on
> >  http://fremantle.org/paul/Web_Services_Server_options_for_Axis_C.html)
> >  and we might need to address the server side in a separate
> >  release.
> >
> >  Carsten
> >
> >
> >  -----Original Message-----
> >  From: Samisa Abeysinghe [mailto:sabeysinghe@virtusa.com]
> >  Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 10:14 AM
> >  To: Apache AXIS C Developers List
> >  Subject: Re: 1.5 Release
> >
> >
> >  Hi Sanjaya,
> >                  We have not attended server side as such. However, many
> > fixes to
> >  serialization/de-serialization in general and code generation has solved
> >  many problem which were generic to both sides.
> >
> >                  We have done some level of testing with C++ server against
> > C++ clients
> >  and about 65% of the tests pass. Some of the failing ones are due to
> >  Skeleton implementation errors. So I would rather say that the code base
> >  is fairly stable.
> >                  I have been able to fix the simple axis server issue as
> > well. Hence my
> >  feeling is that this is above beta quality (compared to 1.4 etc) and we
> >  could do a 1.5 final.
> >
> >  Thanks,
> >  Samisa...
> >
> >  On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 10:27, sanjaya singharage wrote:
> >  > Hi all,
> >  >
> >  > Are we attending to the serverside issues?
> >  >
> >  > How about releasing a beta? but making sure that the client side is
> >  > release quality. That way the beta will offer a snap shot of the
> >  > stable client side for people who want the client features quickly and
> >  > it will not be the final.(However originally in the release plan a
> >  > beta was not talked about). But this does present a problem for us
> >  > over here because we will only be able to test against the Axis c++
> >  > server side.But we need to have the serverside operate reasonably even
> >  > for a beta.
> >  >
> >  > I need some time to integrate the services to the ant services
> >  > framework (should be able to do it by tomorrow).and then we can see
> >  > how the serverside is operating.
> >  >
> >  > what do you think folks? any other options available? Is it possible
> >  > to go for a code freeze?
> >  >
> >  > sanjaya.
> >  --
> >  Samisa Abeysinghe <sabeysinghe@virtusa.com>
> >  Virtusa Corporation
> >
> >
> 
> --
> Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
>

Mime
View raw message