axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From WJ Krpelan <krpelan...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: SOAP styles
Date Mon, 31 Aug 2009 08:50:00 GMT

Hi
http://ws.apache.org/axis/java/reference.html
hopefully answers your last question, dont expect bugfixes any more ;-)
there is a migration guide for axis1 to axis2 webservices,
http://ws.apache.org/axis2/1_5/migration.html
dont think there is any special attention to preserving soap-styles however. its really not
in the spirit nowadays, see
http://ws-i.org/
you didnt mention why you would want to migrate
good luck,
Wolfgang

--- On Fri, 8/28/09, Demetris <demetris@ece.neu.edu> wrote:

> From: Demetris <demetris@ece.neu.edu>
> Subject: Re: SOAP styles
> To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
> Date: Friday, August 28, 2009, 7:41 PM
> 
> Well I will certainly push the notion of upgrading the
> target servers but there are cases where the customer does
> not
> want to do that. So we NEED to deal with deprecated styles
> - so the question will remain if Axis 1.4 can generate
> one and only or multiple (even if deprecated) styles
> programmatically?
> 
> Cheers
> 
> WJ Krpelan wrote:
> > Hi,
> > all SOAP styles except doc/lit are kind of deprecated
> by now and are no longer fully supported by most frameworks,
> if at all.
> > You better migrate everything to doc/lit, resp.
> doc/lit "wrapped" I suppose
> > Cheers, Wolfgang
> > 
> > 
> > --- On Thu, 8/27/09, Demetris <demetris@ece.neu.edu>
> wrote:
> > 
> >   
> >> From: Demetris <demetris@ece.neu.edu>
> >> Subject: SOAP styles
> >> To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
> >> Date: Thursday, August 27, 2009, 10:10 PM
> >> Hi all,
> >> 
> >> we have some legacy systems still using Axis 1.4
> and we
> >> need clients from them to generate SOAP
> >> rpc/lit or doc/lit instead of rpc/enc - does
> anyone know if
> >> the latter is the default for Axis 1.4
> >> and how it can be manipulated programmatically?
> >> 
> >> Thanks
> >> 
> >> Ruwan Linton wrote:
> >>     
> >>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 11:21 PM, Deepal
> jayasinghe
> >>>       
> >> <deepalk@gmail.com
> >> <mailto:deepalk@gmail.com>>
> >> wrote:
> >>     
> >>>      >
> >>>      > No I can't, I guess
> I
> >>>       
> >> have explained why I can't use it as well,
> >>     
> >>>      > because I cannot
> >>>       
> >> differentiate the undeployment call for the hot
> >>     
> >>>      > update and real
> >>>       
> >> undeployment. Well, what Amila suggested will
> work
> >>     
> >>>      > though :-)
> >>>      Of course you can if the
> file
> >>>       
> >> is there then that is hot-update else it
> >>     
> >>>      is un deployment.
> >>>      >
> >>>      >
> >>>      >
> >>>      >   
>    
> >>    >
> >>     
> >>>      >   
>    
> >>    > I propose adding a update method
> to
> >> the Deployer interface or
> >>     
> >>>      >   
>    
> >>    passing
> >>     
> >>>      >   
>    
> >>    > the state as an argument,
> >>     
> >>>      > 
>    I
> >>>       
> >> would consider undeploy as the update method you
> can do
> >>     
> >>>      whatever you
> >>>      >   
>    
> >>    want there, and you can just ignore
> at
> >> when it call deploy
> >>     
> >>>      method.
> >>>      >   
>    
> >>    (I know in undeploy method you only
> get
> >> the filename, but
> >>     
> >>>      since your
> >>>      >   
>    
> >>    deployer is domain specific you know
> what
> >> to do with the
> >>     
> >>>      file name)
> >>>      >
> >>>      >
> >>>      > No, the issue is we
> need
> >>>       
> >> to invoke a different code in the case
> >>     
> >>>      of hot
> >>>      > update.
> >>>      Yes, as I mentioned
> earlier if
> >>>       
> >> the file is there then that is
> >>     
> >>>      hot-update, else
> >>>       
> >> un-deployment. So it should not be a big issues.
> >>     
> >>>      >
> >>>      > Anyway I feel I
> should go
> >>>       
> >> for a synapse deployer :-)
> >>     
> >>>      I though you already have
> >>>       
> >> deployer for synapse.
> >>     
> >>> I mean a new deployer framework
> implementation, not an
> >>>       
> >> deployer.. anyway synapse doesn't have a deployer
> yet.
> >>     
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Ruwan
> >>> 
> >>> -- Ruwan Linton
> >>> Technical Lead & Product Manager; WSO2
> ESB; http://wso2.org/esb
> >>> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> >>> email: ruwan@wso2.com
> >>>       
> >> <mailto:ruwan@wso2.com>;
> >> cell: +94 77 341 3097
> >>     
> >>> blog: http://ruwansblog.blogspot.com
> >>>       
> >>     
> > 
> > 
> >       
> >   
> 
> 


      

Mime
View raw message