axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sedukhin, Igor" <Igor.Seduk...@ca.com>
Subject RE: Subsystem responsibilities: WSDD
Date Tue, 05 Feb 2002 16:47:09 GMT
Glyn,

The interfaces will be defined in such a way that versioning is always assumed, it is just
that our default implementation of a config provider will basically ignore versioning. In
other words the config provider does not want to implement versioning the default implementation
(which should be inherited) will take care of that, and if config provider supports versioning
it'll override the default implementations of interface methods.

I agree that Engine does not have to make any choices. For the Engine it is always the config
interfaces that we define. They will always assume versioning. Like EngineConfigurationProvider.getConfig(versionStamp)
and .getCurrentVersionStamp(). It's just that some simple EngineConfigurationProviders may
choose to not care about the versionStamp parameter and return a blank string as a current
version stamp.

-- Igor Sedukhin .. (Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com)
-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11788



-----Original Message-----
From: Glyn Normington [mailto:glyn_normington@uk.ibm.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 8:46 AM
To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: RE: Subsystem responsibilities: WSDD



Igor,

You wrote:

>Another important element is to allow config providers to implement or 
>not
to implement versioning.

Then the engine would have to be able to cope correctly with both kinds of providers and so
it would be worse off than today. I think it would be much better if all providers  supported
versioning so the engine has a single scheme to deal with.

Glyn


Mime
View raw message