Samisa Abeysinghe wrote:
Damitha Kumarage wrote:
Hi,
Samisa Abeysinghe wrote:
For woden and xml_schema, I see that the include folder has a sub
folder with the respective name and then we have the include files
in them with the prefix axis2_woden and axis2_xml_schema.
This is validating namespaces twice.
1. We do not need the sub folder
Actually I think what we should have followed is the folder base
namespace rather than prefix based one. I suggest
this at least for the new projects. Otherwise if we make a install to
default places in unix it would clutter standard
folders with axis2 prefixed files. It is very neat if they all go
inside a folder like /usr/local/inclue/woden
2. we do not need the axis2_ part of the prefix (Yes I know we
started with these as part of axis2, but not any more)
we don't need any prefix if we put headers in a folder
We separed those two projects from the main code base after they were
already started. That's why axis2 prefix.
Yes we need to remove axis2 prefix not only from xml_schema and woden
projects but also from other axis2 platform
emerging projects like security etc.
Well, we initially came up with the idea of having a prefix for the
header file name by looking at the APR project as our master guide.
What they do is that, when they install, they install stuff to a
folder in /usr/include/apr-[n], where n represents the versions.
As an example, I have /usr/include/apr-0/, and inside that folder all
the headers had either apr_ or apu_ prefix.
What this basically means is that we can accommodate parallel versions
to reside on the same machine.
Hence why not we also adhere to the same standard. We install our
header into axis2-0.92 in install location and all the headers are put
there with axis2_, axiom_, woden_ and xml_schema_ prefixes. When
including the header, the use does not have to use a folder prefix in
#include. Also, no need to bother about putting multiple paths to -I,
all that you need is -I/usr/include/axis2-0.92 (or whatever version of
axis2 installed). Would that not be cleaner?
Ok this has been a historical debate with us(since Axis C++ time).
Unfortunately I have forgotten(or did not understand the first time)
about the plan you described here when I created the structure for
xml_schema and woden. Anyway I would like to make +1 for the above plan
and adhere to it. Also I'll remove axis2 prefix from
woden and xml_schema asap and prefix them with woden_ and xm_schema_
respectively.
thanks
Damitha
So I propose we remove those
We also have axis2_om as our prefix for OM related stuff, shall we
change that to axiom (yes this affects header name, struct name and
method name prefixes as well as macro prefixes) But we better do it
now, without waiting till 1.0 release.
+1.
It is better if we wait for these changes until atleast the initial
code base of xml_schema and woden is completed(In 3 or 4 days time).
Otherwise I would lost my concentration again(This first time I lost
is when having those env changes few days back).
Well, I have lot my concentration already ;-) I have put my others
tasks that I was working on to the *todo* waiting list as these are
also *important* :)
Anyway, yes, we can wait.
Samisa...
Thanks
Damitha
Thanks,
Samisa...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
