The "customer first" approach would be to get the behavior right. In the
future, we need to be much more careful about getting that behavior right
before we release. Do that, and our customers will be much happier.
Axis 1.1 is a definite improvement over 1.0 even if it did point out many
of the mistakes we had made in our Axis dependent code and WSDL/Schema
definitions (mistakes that Axis 1.0 let us get away with because of 1.0's
incorrect behaviors). If that means we have to take more time on our side
to correct our mistakes, so be it. I'd rather have Axis working properly.
- James Snell
IBM Emerging Technologies
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(877) 511-5082 (voice/fax) ** NEW NUMBER **
(700) 930-1979 (t/l) ** NEW NUMBER **
Programming Web Services With SOAP
O'Reilly & Associates, ISBN 0596000952
Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous.
Do not be terrified, do not be discouraged, for the Lord your
God will be with you whereever you go. - Joshua 1:9
Doug Davis/Raleigh/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
03/11/2003 12:16 PM
Please respond to axis-dev
To
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc
bcc
Subject
RE: wsdl2java change
Tom,
You're missing my point - upgrading from 1.0 to 1.1 should be as painless
as possible. This is just one instance, of many, where things have
changed
"for good reasons" without concern for existing code. Initially people
made
serious API changes after 1.0, we've managed to put those back in, and at
the time
they made the same arguments your making now. If a flag (or some other
means
of supporting existing users) isn't added then fine - we'll work around it
- we
have for other things, but I still believe a "customer first" attitude is
the right
approach.
-Dug
Tom Jordahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 03/11/2003 03:01:43 PM
Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject: RE: wsdl2java change
I would say no, we should not add a flag for this.
We knew Axis 1.0 had problems and that we would have to fix them. This is
an (unfortunate) instance where someone got bitten by something we did
wrong. But I would argue that the behavior now is correct, and the past
behavior is just broken. It seems a bit premature to put in switches to
preserve broken 1.0 behavior.
So you had things in different namespaces, but you never collided on the
names and you expected them all to be in the same package? That just
seems
weird. What if you had two things with the same name?
--
Tom Jordahl
Macromedia Server Development
-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 2:49 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: wsdl2java change
I understand the desire for the change, but we need to be more
careful - upgrading from 1.0 to 1.1 should not require weeks worth
of work - which is what it has become for us. Some of the changes
are good (noticing more errors in wsdl docs and such) but some
things, like this, are real b*ll-busters for people. When a change
like this goes in it would be much nicer if a flag were added to
allow people the old and new functionality (people can then argue
about the default) and it can be removed when 2.0 goes out.
But the ultimate goal for a "point" release should
be "drop-n-go", not "drop and devote weeks of development time
figuring out all of the changes in APIs and behavior". It only limits
Axis' success and acceptability. So, can we get a flag added?
-Dug
Tom Jordahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 03/11/2003 02:38:43 PM
Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject: RE: wsdl2java change
Hi Dug,
Actually, we FIXED this to differentiate between the two namespaces
http://www.ibm.com/foo and http://www.ibm.com/bar.
This is probably going to be a very common case, as companies will want to
have more than a single package for everything in their namespaces.
I believe this was fixed before 1.1 beta was released....
--
Tom Jordahl
Macromedia Server Development
-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 2:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: wsdl2java change
Since Axis 1.0 wsdl2java has changed behavior w.r.t. how it
converts namespaces into package names. In the past if
the namespace was http://www.ibm.com/foo then the
package would be just com/ibm/www, but now it appears
as though there's an extra level ("foo") being generated.
Is this intentional? And more importantly was it worth breaking
compatibility with 1.0? While most of us are aware that breaking
Axis APIs isn't good people need to be aware that people are using
and counting on the tools (java2wsdl and wsdl2java) to remain
stable as well - and they will treat their functionality and APIs
just like Axis APIs. So, back to the original question, did we
really mean to break this functionality?
-Dug
