On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Luciano Resende <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 12:13 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: >> Sounds good to me, presumably in 2.x the OASIS one would be the >> primary binding and the old Tuscany one would be deprecated just there >> for backward compatibility. >> > > I'm not sure if I even want to add the current (soon to be old) > binding-http into 2.x as the OASIS current direction is to use the one > in draft status now. >
That comes down to what we decide about backward compatibility, if we want to be able to say 2.x is backward compatible to 1.x then we need all the old extensions supported in 1.x. Or we might say its "mostly" backward compaible and document a few things not supportted in 2.x. Its probably also possible to support a reasonable subset of the 1.x binding.http function with the new OASIS one with just a little extra code to support the old tuscany namespace. ...ant
