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: domain of ajith.ranabahu@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.170.201 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references;
        b=WkSW0q15O7/E2G37HrMUbSarwnJ3U+TMzoZNzd1VM7EDtN97uDafkjZMYZgZPYozZwX6DlUzLNeWimtzWJhm9AYCrPmo2rbxvA3ps/J4QAopWAVR3B/exFrRfiFOw8XMZVFZAcNre5C5+uJI9ElKRpNpgGrqN1DlyYl1m1SlI0w=
Message-ID: <f43ea57904110822543bf6c027@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 12:54:50 +0600
From: Ajith Ranabahu <ajith.ranabahu@gmail.com>
Reply-To: Ajith Ranabahu <ajith.ranabahu@gmail.com>
To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org, Srinath Perera <hemapani@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Axis2] Phase Handlers
In-Reply-To: <f8de7ee041108223246dc2237@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <023601c4c573$1558f980$0965a8c0@deepal>
	 <f43ea579041108015829445a03@mail.gmail.com>
	 <005101c4c5eb$65258280$0bffff0a@LANKABOOK>
	 <033d01c4c60c$9a087810$0965a8c0@deepal>
	 <f8de7ee041108223246dc2237@mail.gmail.com>

not much of thoughts but I have a single,very important question

* who/what is going to determine the order of the handlers INSIDE the
phase then. Lets say you want to run the logging handler (the most
famous example) before all the handlers. In other words you want it to
be the first handler of the first phase. How can this be done?


On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 12:32:34 +0600, Srinath Perera <hemapani@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry, bit late to catch up  but seems (at least to me:D) we are
> agreeing on something wrong!!
> > > > In the case of before and after they refer to "handlers". The phases
> > > > are NOT ordered dynamicaly, they are just static. (we can even give
> > > > the phase order in the axis global config file if we want to). However
> > > > every handler MUST belong to at least one phase.
> 
> Here we going to decide on before, after refers to Handler names ..
> not the phase name. To me that is wrong!!!
> 1) The Handler writers do not know the handlers names of other
> handlers (Handler names are subjected to change .. the rules based on
> Handler names do not going to help us like set of defined phase.. so
> all the rules should based on phases .. not handler names )
> 2) If before/after is a handlers we do not need phases at all, we can
> get all the orders by just referring to handlers!
> 
> To me the rationale for Phases to Exist is handler developers do not
> know the names of Handlers .. so we have defined phases, encryption
> Phase, authentication phase ...RM phase logging phase ;)
> All the rules are based on phases not handlers so the handler
> developers can say I need to run the RM after authentication but
> before encryption etc ......with out knowing the finer details about
> the Encryption or security handlers.
> thoughts?
> Thanks
> Srinath
> 


-- 
Ajith Ranabahu