axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Volkmann, Mark" <Mark.Volkm...@AGEDWARDS.com>
Subject RE: repost of WSDL2Java question
Date Tue, 02 Apr 2002 20:33:53 GMT
Sorry, I was getting confused between the beta 1 functionality (generating
skeletons by default) and the post-beta 1 function (not). After looking at
JavaDeployWriter I see that it will either use the skeleton class or the
impl class depending on whether a skeleton was generated (controlled by the
-S option when not using the default).
 
Thanks for explaining the rationale for not supporting the option I
suggested. I think I agree with you now.
 
 -----Original Message-----
From: Glen Daniels [mailto:gdaniels@macromedia.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 1:45 PM
To: 'axis-dev@xml.apache.org'
Subject: RE: repost of WSDL2Java question



I don't believe that's what it does by default, otherwise a lot of our tests
would fail.  Right now by default it doesn't make a skeleton, and the
deploy.wsdd should point to the Impl class.
 
I'm ambivalent about the option, since there's no guarantee that your class
matches the WSDL, whereas the Impl will for sure.  So I think I'd either a)
make the user do the extra little bit of work to edit the WSDD to switch
things, OR b) add the option but confirm that there are matching methods in
the class (more work).
 
--Glen

-----Original Message-----
From: Volkmann, Mark [mailto:Mark.Volkmann@AGEDWARDS.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 1:22 PM
To: 'axis-dev@xml.apache.org'
Subject: RE: repost of WSDL2Java question



Do you agree that WSDL2Java currently does the wrong thing by default? 
By this I mean it doesn't generate a skeleton class, but the deploy.wsdd it
generates refers to the non-existent skeleton class.

I really think the solution is to allow the user to pass an option to
WSDL2Java that specifies the name of an alternate class they want to refer
to in the generated deploy.wsdd file.

> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Russell Butek [ mailto:butek@us.ibm.com <mailto:butek@us.ibm.com> ] 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 12:04 PM 
> To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org 
> Subject: RE: repost of WSDL2Java question 
> 
> 
> No.  There are some of us that believe the deploy.wsdd file 
> is not the most 
> appropriate place for metadata.  We PREFER the metadata on 
> the skeleton. 
> If you really care I can go into details, but I just wanted 
> to say that 
> skeletons are NOT deprecated and there's nothing wrong with 
> using them. 
> AXIS simply supports 2 different models. 
> 
> Russell Butek 
> butek@us.ibm.com 
> 
> 
> "Volkmann, Mark" <Mark.Volkmann@AGEDWARDS.com> on 04/02/2002 
> 11:36:15 AM 
> 
> Please respond to axis-dev@xml.apache.org 
> 
> To:    "'axis-dev@xml.apache.org'" <axis-dev@xml.apache.org> 
> cc: 
> Subject:    RE: repost of WSDL2Java question 
> 
> Is it  accurate to say that the use of generated skeleton 
> classes is now 
> discouraged  and deprecated? 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Glen Daniels  [ mailto:gdaniels@macromedia.com
<mailto:gdaniels@macromedia.com> ] 
> Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 12:54  PM 
> To: 'axis-dev@xml.apache.org' 
> Subject: RE: repost of  WSDL2Java question 
> 
> 
> The  Skeleton class is no longer generated by default, we now put the 
> metadata that  it contained into the WSDD descriptor.  You 
> can still get it 
> by  specifying the --skeletonDeploy option for the tool,  though. 



****************************************************************************
***********
WARNING: All e-mail sent to and from this address will be received or
otherwise recorded by the A.G. Edwards corporate e-mail system and is
subject to archival, monitoring or review by, and/or disclosure to,
someone other than the recipient.
****************************************************************************
***********




***************************************************************************************
WARNING:  All e-mail sent to and from this address will be received or
otherwise recorded by the A.G. Edwards corporate e-mail system and is
subject to archival, monitoring or review by, and/or disclosure to,
someone other than the recipient.
***************************************************************************************

Mime
View raw message