Hi Samisa In addition to above issue, ES is still not supporting all the RXT configuration elements(ex: unbounded table option) which are currently supported by G-Reg. We have reported JIRAs to get those added to coming up releases.
Regards, Chandana On Mar 8, 2014 7:09 AM, "Janaka Ranabahu" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Samisa, > > IMO, it should be ES. But the current ES architecture does not pick new > RXT types automatically and some configurations to jaggery config files are > required to show the new asset in both Store and Publisher[1]. Until we > have a more flexible way of generating the Store and Publisher UI, I > believe we have to stick with G-Reg. > > Thanks, > Janaka > > [1] https://docs.wso2.org/display/ES100/Adding+a+New+Asset+Type > > > On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 8:08 PM, Samisa Abeysinghe <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We used to position G-Reg as a store of anything with RXT. >> >> Now what ES is there, and is more capable, do we propose the users use ES >> or G-Reg RXT like use cases? >> >> Thanks, >> Samisa... >> >> >> Samisa Abeysinghe >> >> Vice President Developer Evangelism >> >> WSO2 Inc. >> http://wso2.com >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Architecture mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture >> >> > > > -- > *Janaka Ranabahu* > Senior Software Engineer; WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com > > > * E-mail: [email protected] <http://wso2.com>**M: **+94 718370861 > <%2B94%20718370861>* > > Lean . Enterprise . Middleware > > _______________________________________________ > Architecture mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture > >
_______________________________________________ Architecture mailing list [email protected] https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
