axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James M Snell <jasn...@us.ibm.com>
Subject RE: wsdl2java change
Date Tue, 11 Mar 2003 22:24:41 GMT
+1 to this.  We need to be careful about making sure what goes out in a 
release is well behaved.  There were quite a few mistakes with 1.0 that 
should not be repeated.

- James Snell
     IBM Emerging Technologies
     jasnell@us.ibm.com
     (877) 511-5082 (voice/fax)   ** NEW NUMBER **
     (700) 930-1979 (t/l)                ** NEW NUMBER **
     Programming Web Services With SOAP
         O'Reilly & Associates, ISBN 0596000952

     Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. 
     Do not be terrified, do not be discouraged, for the Lord your 
     God will be with you whereever you go.    - Joshua 1:9



Rick Rineholt/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
03/11/2003 02:12 PM
Please respond to axis-dev


To
axis-dev@ws.apache.org
cc

bcc

Subject
RE: wsdl2java change




>+1. No Flags for Bad behavior. 
  +1 To flog for Bad behavior. :-)

Rick Rineholt

rineholt@us.ibm.com

 

Please respond to axis-dev@ws.apache.org  

To:        axis-dev@ws.apache.org 
cc:          
Subject:        RE: wsdl2java change 



+1. No Flags for Bad behavior.
 
Thanks,
dims
 
--- James M Snell <jasnell@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> +1 to this. No flagging.  Old code that relied on bad behavior is simply
> going to get broken.  The only thing Axis can say is sorry we didn't get
> it right the first time, here's the fixed code, have fun.
>
> - James Snell
>      IBM Emerging Technologies
>      jasnell@us.ibm.com
>      (877) 511-5082 (voice/fax)   ** NEW NUMBER **
>      (700) 930-1979 (t/l)                ** NEW NUMBER **
>      Programming Web Services With SOAP
>          O'Reilly & Associates, ISBN 0596000952
>
>      Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous.
>      Do not be terrified, do not be discouraged, for the Lord your
>      God will be with you whereever you go.    - Joshua 1:9
>
>
>
> Tom Jordahl <tomj@macromedia.com>
> 03/11/2003 12:01 PM
> Please respond to axis-dev
>
>
> To
> "'axis-dev@ws.apache.org'" <axis-dev@ws.apache.org>
> cc
>
> bcc
>
> Subject
> RE: wsdl2java change
>
>
>
>
> I would say no, we should not add a flag for this.
>
> We knew Axis 1.0 had problems and that we would have to fix them.  This 
is
> an (unfortunate) instance where someone got bitten by something we did
> wrong.  But I would argue that the behavior now is correct, and the past
> behavior is just broken.  It seems a bit premature to put in switches to
> preserve broken 1.0 behavior.
>
> So you had things in different namespaces, but you never collided on the
> names and you expected them all to be in the same package?  That just
> seems weird.  What if you had two things with the same name?
>
> --
> Tom Jordahl
> Macromedia Server Development
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 2:49 PM
> To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
> Subject: RE: wsdl2java change
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I understand the desire for the change, but we need to be more
> careful - upgrading from 1.0 to 1.1 should not require weeks worth
> of work - which is what it has become for us.  Some of the changes
> are good (noticing more errors in wsdl docs and such) but some
> things, like this, are real b*ll-busters for people.  When a change
> like this goes in it would be much nicer if a flag were added to
> allow people the old and new functionality (people can then argue
> about the default) and it can be removed when 2.0 goes out.
> But the ultimate goal for a "point" release should
> be "drop-n-go", not "drop and devote weeks of development time
> figuring out all of the changes in APIs and behavior".  It only limits
> Axis' success and acceptability.  So, can we get a flag added?
> -Dug
>
>
> Tom Jordahl <tomj@macromedia.com> on 03/11/2003 02:38:43 PM
>
> Please respond to axis-dev@ws.apache.org
>
> To:    "'axis-dev@ws.apache.org'" <axis-dev@ws.apache.org>
> cc:
> Subject:    RE: wsdl2java change
>
>
> Hi Dug,
>
> Actually, we FIXED this to differentiate between the two namespaces
> http://www.ibm.com/foo and http://www.ibm.com/bar.
>
> This is probably going to be a very common case, as companies will want 
to
> have more than a single package for everything in their namespaces.
>
> I believe this was fixed before 1.1 beta was released....
>
> --
> Tom Jordahl
> Macromedia Server Development
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 2:35 PM
> To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
> Subject: wsdl2java change
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Since Axis 1.0 wsdl2java has changed behavior w.r.t. how it
> converts namespaces into package names.  In the past if
> the namespace was http://www.ibm.com/foo then the
> package would be just com/ibm/www, but now it appears
> as though there's an extra level ("foo") being generated.
> Is this intentional?  And more importantly was it worth breaking
> compatibility with 1.0?  While most of us are aware that breaking
> Axis APIs isn't good people need to be aware that people are using
> and counting on the tools (java2wsdl and wsdl2java) to remain
> stable as well - and they will treat their functionality and APIs
> just like Axis APIs.  So, back to the original question, did we
> really mean to break this functionality?
> -Dug
>
>
>
 

=====
Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online 
http://webhosting.yahoo.com 




Mime
View raw message