On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:36 PM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:02 PM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 9:12 AM, Simon Laws <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:49 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Simon Laws <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 12:53 PM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:52 PM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The Axis2 1.5 release looks like it could start being voted on this week >>>>>>> but that often can take some time and then the JMS transport would be >>>>>>> released separately after that and then we'd need some time to polish a >>>>>>> Tuscany release including those. So all that would likley take some >>>>>>> weeks. >>>>>>> There are alternatives like trying to port the new JMS transport to our >>>>>>> existing ws binding, but thats likely a bit more work. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> If we're to get a 1.5 release out this month I'm starting to think we >>>>>> should go with porting the new Axis2 JMS transport to work with the >>>>>> existing Tuscany WS binding. >>>>>> >>>>>> Axis2 still haven't had their release and after that does happen there >>>>>> would need to be a follow on release of the transports and all that >>>>>> will have to take at lease a couple of weeks and then we'd need to >>>>>> pick it up in Tuscany before doing the Tuscany 1.5 release...so all >>>>>> that would likely push the Tuscany release in to June. >>>>>> >>>>>> So unless anyone can see any issues with the approach I'm going to >>>>>> start looking at bringing the new Axis2 JMS transport into the Tuscany >>>>>> WS binding. At least that will help us know how hard it is to do and >>>>>> we can throw it all away if the Axis2 releases do start to happen more >>>>>> quickly. >>>>>> >>>>>> ...ant >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sounds like the right thing to do given where we are. We also have >>>>> this WSDL issue that Dave raised that I was going to look at. Is it >>>>> safe to assume that we wait until these are done before retaking the >>>>> branch? >>>>> >>>>> Simon >>>>> >>>> >>>> I've fixed the soap/jms issue in TUSCANY-2916 now, whats the status of >>>> the wsdl issue in TUSCANY-2900, is the work around in there enough for >>>> us to start on the 1.5 release again now? >>>> >>>> ...ant >>>> >>> >>> I think it is. But maybe what we could do is run though the tests, >>> legal etc in 1.x before cutting the branch to give a day or so more >>> for responses. I intend to give the samples a runt through as soon as >>> I can get done with some 2.x things I'm working on. >>> >>> Simon >>> >> >> Ok good, we're starting to run out of time to get this out this month >> so unless anyone objects i'll cut a release branch tomorrow. If you >> must commit to 1.x before this is done then please be a little >> careful, verify relevant samples and test, and run a full build etc. >> >> ...ant >> > > FYI a full build shows five failures presently: > > samples\binding-notification-consumer > samples\binding-notification-producer > samples\simple-callback-ws > itest\exceptions > itest\jms > > I'll start with looking at that JMS one, anyone feel free to jump in > and help with the others. > > ...ant >
Just investigating this JMS funny from the list. I'll jump in when I'm done. Simon
