Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-axis-dev-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 47213 invoked by uid 500); 30 Oct 2001 14:37:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact axis-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list axis-dev@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 47203 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 14:37:10 -0000 Message-ID: From: Mark Roder To: "'axis-dev@xml.apache.org'" Subject: Items to discuss during the chat Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 08:37:28 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N During today's chat, can the following be discussed? --Review patch and add --give pointers on where to fix other issue with fault decoding I submitted a patch for src/org/apache/axis/message/SOAPFaultBuilder.java to try and get java/test/faults/FaultDecode.java to work. See email dated 24 Oct. I would like this patch reviewed and added. I also requested some help on trying to fix the other portion of the problem in getting the fault details. --Review adding Receipt object to bidbuy sample --Review bug report - give pointers how to fix I submitted a bug report on 24 Oct about "Issue: Namespace problems and deserialization". In it was modifications for a Receipt object. This changed the bidbuy example to not only pass objects from the client to the server but to also get a non-string object returned. I think this makes for a better example and should be added. With the Receipt object added, some modifications can be made to expose a bug on not being able to deserialize an object if it has no namespaces. Any pointers on where to look for a resolution to the problem would be great. Note: I submitted a patch on 2 Oct to RPCHeader.java that worked around the namespace issue on the code base back then, but not sure if that was a "just make it work" or the "correct solution" --Criteria to release Alpha 3 version What criteria is used to consider a alpha 3 release? The ServiceClient/Call conversion between A2 and the current code base(and the fact the tests run) probably could stand another alpha release soon so people don't pick up bad habits/code by using ServiceClient. Thanks for the help. Later Mark