axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jaime Meritt <jmer...@sonicsoftware.com>
Subject RE: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution
Date Wed, 08 Jan 2003 14:13:04 GMT
Steve,

+1 to the extensions directory.  If this is created I would be happy to
put the Sonic extensions in there.  However, do you envision this as a
1.1 deliverable or something for the future?  

For 1.1 perhaps it would be best to build everything into axis.jar so
that we don't destabilize the build process.  For the next point release
we can pursue the generic extensions mechanisms you propose.  Comments?

Thanks,
Jaime

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Loughran [mailto:steve_l@iseran.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 8:46 PM
To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution


----- Original Message -----
From: "James M Snell" <jasnell@us.ibm.com>
To: <axis-dev@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 21:11
Subject: RE: JMS transport not in 1.1 binary distribution


> Btw, I personally think that individual Axis transports should be put
into
> their own jar files (e.g. axis-jms.jar, axis-local.jar, axis-http.jar,
> etc) so if a particular application doesn't need a particular
transport it
> can simply remove the jar file altogether.  But that's just my opinion

+1.

IMO we could generic this with a general 'axis extension jar'; have a
descriptor that lists classes that implement some optional plugin
interface
that get autocalled on plug in as AxisEngine boots up. This would be
useful
for handlers, transports and other things.

Speaking of extensions, say I had something I was looking to commit that
was
definately an axis extension. Where should it go in CVS. I propose a new
/extensions subdir for these things, which are not proposals but  not
core
codebase either.

-steve



Mime
View raw message