Mailing-List: contact axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
Message-ID: <19e0530f04070212317dde0fb4@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 15:31:09 -0400
From: Davanum Srinivas <davanum@gmail.com>
Reply-To: dims@apache.org
To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: SAAJ 1.2, JAX-RPC 1.1, WS-I BP qualifies for a Axis 2.0 label?
In-Reply-To: <BB19FB6E27A03443802183580F6E87950613F5@usmail3k3.us.Micros.int>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <BB19FB6E27A03443802183580F6E87950613F5@usmail3k3.us.Micros.int>

Rick,

I was talking to Glen about another Beta next week, that could be
renamed 2.0 Beta. After the beta, we can take care of Performance
issues, re-run the TCK's and release 2.0 Final.

-- dims

PS: SUN renamed JDK 1.5 Beta to Java 5.0 Beta :)

On Fri, 2 Jul 2004 15:19:07 -0400, Kellogg, Richard <rkellogg@micros.com> wrote:
> Dims,
> 
> I agree the changes warrant a version number change.  Will we confuse people by releasing a 1.2 Beta and a 2.0 Final release?  What is the precedent in the Jakarta project?  Just my two cents.
> 
> Rick Kellogg
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Davanum Srinivas [mailto:davanum@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 02, 2004 3:03 PM
> To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
> Subject: Re: SAAJ 1.2, JAX-RPC 1.1, WS-I BP qualifies for a Axis 2.0
> label?
> 
> glen, tom,
> 
> thoughts?
> 
> -- dims
> 
> On Fri, 2 Jul 2004 22:58:55 +0600, Sanjiva Weerawarana
> <sanjiva@opensource.lk> wrote:
> > I don't think this is a good idea .. the changes are incremental
> > changes and not radical. I personal prefer to make major version
> > changes when there's more than incremental changes.
> >
> > I do agree its good to be ahead of the Axis/C++ version #s ..
> > but they're on a much faster release cycle. Part of it of course
> > is because Axis/Java 1.0 was not a 1.0 like Axis/C++ was .. it had
> > the benefit of a prior impl (Apache SOAP) .. so we really should've
> > started with Axis/Java 3.0. However, since we started with 1.0, this
> > seems like the wrong time to jump ship to 2.0.
> >
> > I'm -0 on this.
> >
> > Sanjiva.
> > p.s.: We're not (and no one is) WSDL 2.0 supportive yet of course.
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Steve Loughran" <stevel@apache.org>
> > To: <axis-dev@ws.apache.org>
> > Sent: Friday, July 02, 2004 10:39 PM
> > Subject: Re: SAAJ 1.2, JAX-RPC 1.1, WS-I BP qualifies for a Axis 2.0 label?
> >
> > > Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> > > > Glen, Tom, Ias, Steve, others,
> > > >
> > > > Since we are certifying against SAAJ 1.2 and JAX-RPC 1.1 and since
> > > > JAX-RPC 1.1 implies conformance to WS-I BP. This is major stuff going
> > > > on :) I also want to be ahead of the Axis C++ version #'s as well :)
> > > > :)
> > > >
> > > > So, shall we up the label to 2.0? and release an updated beta next week?
> > >
> > > Seems good to me. There has been a lot of change from 1.1. And given
> > > WSDL1.1 went to to 2.0, we can only be compatible :)
> > >
> >
> >
> 
> --
> Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
> 
> 


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