On Tuesday, September 20, 2011 3:18:51 AM gliesian wrote: > From a user expectation standpoint, example programs should work (e.g., > access external dependencies).
Well, from my standpoint, it really depends on what the purpose of the example is. For example, we COULD have an example that showed how to create and use a CXF client to access salesforce.com data. There definitely could be some value in something like that to some people. However, it would obviously require access to external services. In cases like this, it's vital to point out, up front, in the README what the requirements are and set the expectations immediately. Another example may be using CXF clients to manipulate your Amazon cloud via AWS. Again, useful as an example for some people, but completely dependent on external services (and actually an AWS account for the user). IMO, this particular sample falls into this type of case. The purpose of the interopfest stuff is (OK, was) specifically to show interopability between CXF and .NET. Without shipping full .NET clients, services, and STS, the only way to really show that is to use external services. We tried to be as up front about that in the README as we could. The main issue now is that those services now seem to be gone for good. > Perhaps the interopfest project should not be considered a sample (example) > project... and therefore moved out of the binary distribution and into the > src distribution only, maybe in it's own folder (i.e, not under the samples > folder)? > > If in the event, that the external dependencies are restored and/or included > in the distribution and it makes sense to have the interopfest projects > within the samples, they could be moved back. Everything is in SVN. We can always just restore it or even copy it out of one of the tags if the services come back. That IS why we use version control. :-) At this point, I just don't see the interop plugfest endpoints coming back anytime soon. I would just remove them from the builds for now. Dan > However, to bring this issue to a expedited closure, a more thorough > explanation as to the history of the interopfest project(s), as well as > including information about the current state and future expectation of > these projects in the README.txt file(s) would probably be sufficient, with > no other changes necessary. > > Thanks, > Robert > > -- > View this message in context: > http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-how-to-handle-ws-security-interopfe > st-example-tp4805281p4822033.html Sent from the cxf-dev mailing list archive > at Nabble.com. -- Daniel Kulp [email protected] http://dankulp.com/blog Talend - http://www.talend.com
