Rich,

I understand, Though it would help everyone if you give us some hints
on what's round the corner.

thanks,
dims

On 7/11/07, R J Scheuerle Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Rich Scheuerle
 IBM Web Services
 Apache Axis2 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
 512-838-5115 (IBM TL 678-5115)

 "Davanum Srinivas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/11/2007 04:41:15 PM:

 > Rich,
 >
 > Does it matter what date *exactly* the branch gets cut? either way we
 > need to make sure that you have some place to work. Would it be
 > suffice to say, we should cut the branch when we cut RC2 and that at
 > any point of time, there will be somewhere where the work can go on?

 Hi Dims,
 We have some changes outside of the jaxws and metadata modules.
 Cutting a branch when RC2 is cut is fine with me, as long as we have some
flexibility to continue
 with the fixes.


 >
 > thanks,
 > dims
 >
 > On 7/11/07, R J Scheuerle Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 > >
 > >
 > > Jeff said: the 7/20 deadline requires that the 1.3 branch is created
shortly
 > > after RC2.
 > >
 > >  QUESTION: Will the 1.3 branch be created on 7/16 ?
 > >
 > >  Rich Scheuerle
 > >  IBM Web Services
 > >  Apache Axis2 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
 > >  512-838-5115  (IBM TL 678-5115)
 > >
 > >  Matt Hogstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/11/2007 03:22:19 PM:
 > >
 > >
 > >  > Awesome...cheers.
 > >  >
 > >  >
 > >  > On Jul 11, 2007, at 4:17 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
 > >  >
 > >  > > Let's hope everything gets in by 7/20 :)
 > >  > >
 > >  > > On 7/11/07, Matt Hogstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 > >  > >> This would be great ... at this point Geronimo is waiting on this
 > >  > >> functionality.  If y'all are not planning on getting this
 > >  > >> functionality in soon then should Geronimo ship with CXF as the
only
 > >  > >> certified assembly?  Prefer not but we can't wait forever :)
 > >  > >>
 > >  > >>
 > >  > >> On Jul 10, 2007, at 4:29 PM, Jeff Barrett wrote:
 > >  > >>
 > >  > >> > Hi All,
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> > We've made good progress getting the JAXWS compliance-related
fixes
 > >  > >> > (some
 > >  > >> > listed below) committed.  However, there are still some
outstanding
 > >  > >> > issues
 > >  > >> > we need to fix.  Most of these remaining fixes will be within
the
 > >  > >> > metatdata and jaxws modules, but a few will be in kernel and/or
 > >  > >> > Axiom.  We
 > >  > >> > will not be able to get all those kernel and/or Axiom fixes in
by
 > >  > >> > 7/13 to
 > >  > >> > make RC2.  And, between the time that RC2 is taken and the time
 > >  > >> > that the
 > >  > >> > 1.3 branch is created, we want to avoid dropping things outside
 > >  > >> of the
 > >  > >> > jaxws and metadata modules.
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> > So, in order to continue to make progress on the JAXWS
compliance-
 > >  > >> > related
 > >  > >> > fixes, can we please get the 1.3 branch created as soon as
possible
 > >  > >> > after
 > >  > >> > RC2, perhaps by Monday 7/16?
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> > If the 1.3 branches for Axis2 and Axiom are created on Monday
 > >  > >> 7/16 so
 > >  > >> > trunk is open for continued development across all modules,
then we
 > >  > >> > may be
 > >  > >> > able to get the remaining JAXWS compliance-related issues fixed
by
 > >  > >> > 7/20.
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> > Thanks,
 > >  > >> > Jeff
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> > IBM Software Group - WebSphere Web Services Development
 > >  > >> > Phone: 512-838-4587 or Tie Line 678-4587
 > >  > >> > Internet e-mail and Sametime ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 > >  > >> > ----- Forwarded by Jeff Barrett/Austin/IBM on 07/10/2007 03:06
PM
 > >  > >> > -----
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> > Ann Robinson/Austin/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 > >  > >> > 06/29/2007 10:49 AM
 > >  > >> > Please respond to
 > >  > >> > [email protected]
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> > To
 > >  > >> > [email protected]
 > >  > >> > cc
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> > Subject
 > >  > >> > Re: [VOTE][Axis2] Axis2 1.3 release plan
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> > We are working on a number of fixes to the JAXWS and Metadata
 > >  > >> modules
 > >  > >> > based on some internal testing.  We believe many of these fixes
are
 > >  > >> > required for Geronimo integration of AXIS2 and will help
 > >  > >> Geronimo pass
 > >  > >> > various compliance tests.  If these fixes are needed in the
 > >  > >> AXIS2 1.3
 > >  > >> > release, then they would likely not make an RC1 of July 6.  We
 > >  > >> > think many
 > >  > >> > of the fixes would be submitted/committed by July 20.
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> > Some the problems in the JAXWS/Metadata modules that we are
 > >  > >> working on
 > >  > >> > include:
 > >  > >> > - The metadata layer needs to create AttachmentDescription
objects
 > >  > >> > if the
 > >  > >> > WSDL indicates that the input or output message contains
 > >  > >> attachments
 > >  > >> > - The WebResultAnnot class incorrectly initializes the name
 > >  > >> > attribute to
 > >  > >> > "return" when it is constructed. The default should be "". This
is
 > >  > >> > causing
 > >  > >> > UnmarshallingExceptions in certain cases
 > >  > >> > - Make HTTP transport headers and status code available via the
 > >  > >> JAXWS
 > >  > >> > message context.
 > >  > >> > - JAXWS must understand processing for nonexistent operation
 > >  > >> > - Prevent NPE from calling
 > > getHandlerResolver.getHandlerChain
 > >  > >> before
 > >  > >> > creating service object
 > >  > >> > - NoClassDefFoundError when creating a web service request for
a
 > >  > >> > client
 > >  > >> > app
 > >  > >> > - @HandlerChain annotation in SEI should replace, not add to,
 > >  > >> > @HandlerChain annotation in endpoint impl
 > >  > >> > - Avoid concurrent modification exception when accessing
properties
 > >  > >> > - Remove unnecessary < and > from HTTP start value
 > >  > >> > - createBinding needs to retrieve BindingType appropriately -
 > >  > >> > 'createBinding' needs to be client/server aware so that it will
 > >  > >> call
 > >  > >> > getClientBindingID if this happens to be a dispatch instance
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> > Should the AXIS2 RC1 be delayed to include these fixes?  Or,
should
 > >  > >> > another release (like 1.3.1 or 1.4) be considered for these
fixes?
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> > Thanks,
 > >  > >> > Ann
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >> >
 > >  > >>
 > >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 > >  > >> > 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]
 > >  > >>
 > >  > >>
 > >  > >
 > >  > >
 > >  > > --
 > >  > > Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com
 > >  > >
 > >  > >
 > >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 > >  > > 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]
 > >  >
 > >
 > >
 > >
 >
 >
 > --
 > Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com
 >
 >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 >





--
Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to