On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 9:12 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Luciano Resende <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 8:31 AM, Mike Edwards >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Folks, >>> >>> First I'd like to give a big +1 to upgrading the BPEL support in the current >>> codebase. >>> >> >> I have started this in 1.x >> >>> However, why wait for the ODE 2.0 release? Is it likely that they will >>> formally release their 2.0 within the next 2 months? If not, then we should >>> not wait and both 1.x and 2.x of Tuscany should move up to 1.3.2 right away. >>> >> >> For the ODE 2.x, they have already released a beta version. If we >> start with that, we could probably be a step further to support ODE >> 2.x in Tuscany 2.x codebase. Well, that was my thoughts... >> > > Unless there are compelling features we need it would be good if we > can keep the 1.x and 2.x BPEL extension using the same Ode release so > that the Tuscany code is as close to the same as possible in 1.x and > 2.x so its easy to port fixes back and forth. > >>> I'll be happy to be involved with the 2.x migration - I need a working BPEL >>> implementation for the OASIS BPEL testcases... >>> > > Me too, it would be good to try to start on the 2.x bpel extension > OASIS compliance while the spec is out for public review - thats why > i've already started getting it going in 2.x ;) > > ...ant >
I guess I'm almost there, but I'm getting a missing class from saxon sqj, but i couldn't find this dependency in a public maven repo. Does anyone know a public maven repo that would have saxon 9.x, and that I could find the following dependencies : saxon-9.x.jar saxon-dom-9.x.jar saxon-xpath-9.x.jar saxon-xqj-9.x.jar I'll also try to ask the ODE guys where they are retrieving these dependencies from. -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany, Apache PhotArk http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/
