Seems
to me like option 2 is the long term way to go, but I don't have any strong
feelings about it.
--
Tom
Jordahl
Macromedia
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 5:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Duplicate QName class
I know there was some recent conversation related to
this issue, and I think the concensus was NOT to use the Sun implementation
because of licensing constraints. In the meantime, we still have
java.xml.namespace.QName defined in two places (from AXISs'
perspective):From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 5:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Duplicate QName class
jaxrpc.jar
wsdl4j.jar
We should remove it from one or the other. Given that AXIS pulls wsdl4j.jar, it doesn't make sense that wsdl4j introduce a dependency on AXIS::jaxrpc.jar (circular build dependency).
So:
1. Can we move jaxrpc.jar & source files into commons or some independent (small) project?
2. Alternatively, everyone OK with removing java.xml.namespace.QName from AXIS::jaxrpc.jar and depending upon the version in wsdl4j? Is the wsdl4j::QName up-to-par with the recent changes made to the AXIS version?
<ras>
*******************************************
Richard A. Sitze [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CORBA Interoperability & WebServices
IBM WebSphere Development
