Mailing-List: contact axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
From: "Jarek Gawor" <gawor@mcs.anl.gov>
To: <axis-dev@ws.apache.org>
Subject: RE: Closed: (AXIS-1598) Generated Java artifacts name for Schema
 Anonymous type
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 13:40:14 -0400
Message-ID: <001c01c4b602$b139c6c0$6401a8c0@jgpad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-F59vPY2i03LojJ00002a0f@hotmail.com>
Importance: Normal

I can't argue (much) about being spec complaint. But currently, =
wsdl2java is
broken and needs to be fixed. I don't have time right now to look into =
the
details.=20
My other point / question is, that maybe these sort of 'drastic' changes
should not be happening between rc1 and rc2. One would expect very minor
changes between rc1 and rc2. I don't know if there is some kind of a =
release
policy (feature freeze, etc.) for axis. =20
This change definitely affects a lot of our code and now we have to =
consider
what to do about it.

Jarek

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Choi Jongjin [mailto:gunsnroz@hotmail.com]=20
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 2:36 AM
> To: dims@apache.org; axis-dev@ws.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Closed: (AXIS-1598) Generated Java artifacts=20
> name for Schema Anonymous type
>=20
>=20
> Dear Dims, Jarek, Ias,
>=20
> I know the AXIS-1598 will break the existing applications.
> But I think JAX-RPC compliance is important for Axis.  (SAAJ=20
> compliance is=20
> too. :-> )
>=20
> The axis developers may decide to defer this feature until=20
> Axis 1.3 or=20
> later.=20
> But when it comes, the same problem will occur.
>=20
> What about having a compliance option for wsdl2java,=20
> the possible values are 'axis-classic', 'jaxrpc11'.=20
> I'd like to have the default as 'jaxrpc11' from Axis 1.2.
> This option can help the migration as much as possible.=20
>=20
> I think there are serveral points where Axis does not follow=20
> the jaxrpc=20
> 1.1.
> It seems that whenever the jax-rpc compliance patch is applied,=20
> the backward compatibility issue will be arisen as in this=20
> case. The name collision issue below by ias is another=20
> JAX-RPC compliance=20
> problem.
>=20
> /Jongjin.
>=20
> ps.=20
> Additional test cases will be needed for this. (eg. test/wsdl)
>=20
>=20
>=20