hi, those are good ideas - i was thinking about 1), 2) and 3) too.
this kind of changes may be affecting WSIF users so it becomes even more important to clearly define what is WSIF API and what is implementation to minimize effect of WSIF changes to code that is using it ... i think that clearly package as described in 4) should be an implementation detail and not part of visible API. there should be also better dependency checking in build.xml to avoid lot of errors when WSDL4J is not available (and probably removed or changed JLogFormatter.java to not import com.ibm.logging.Formatter). i would do some of those modifications to buid.xml but i want first to be sure that wsif transition to this repository is finished. thanks, alek ps. it is probably good idea to remove from xml-axis CVS proposal/wsif-1.2 or at least to write there README pointing to new repository. Owen D Burroughs wrote: > We would like to propose the following changes to packages and classes > within WSIF: > > 1) Move org.apache.wsif.stub.WSIFUtils.java to > org.apache.wsif.util.WSIFUtils.java > > 2) Move org.apache.wsif.stub.WSIFPrivateWSDLFactory.java to > org.apache.wsif.wsdl.WSIFPrivateWSDLFactory.java > > 3) Remove the org.apache.wsif.stub package. > > 4) Create a new package called org.apache.wsif.base and move all of the > org.apache.wsif.util.WSIFDefault* classes to it. > > Comments and other ideas are very welcome. > > Thanks, > > Owen > > ------------------------------------- > Owen Burroughs > WSIF Development team
