Ram,
I think it would be wise to compare the process described here with the words in the OASIS Assembly
spec on precisely this point.
Section 11.2.1 of the Public Review draft of the Assembly Spec says:
3468 Where present, artifact-related or packaging-related artifact resolution
mechanisms MUST be used
3469 by the SCA runtime to resolve artifact dependencies. [ASM12005] The SCA
runtime MUST raise
3470 an error if an artifact cannot be resolved using these mechanisms, if
present. [ASM12021]
This says that you should not mix the use of "artifact specific" mechanisms with SCA artifact
resolution mechanisms. Use one or other but never both.
The question I ask is - why would you want to mix them?? If the artifacts (such as WSDLs) are there
inside one or other contribution, why use @wsdlLocation at all?? And if you're using @wsdlLocation,
why would you include a copy of the target WSDL in your contribution? And what happens if the two
alternative artifacts are actually different?
Yours, Mike.
Ramkumar R wrote:
Hi All,
We had a discuss on this topic (Use of non-SCA Mechanisms for Resolving
Artifacts) in the month of March under this thread
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg05956.html
What we agreed on as a process to follow for the non-SCA mechanism is.....
1. get artifact location from import/include
2. if there is a location then do artifact specific resolution
3. retrieve the artifact using the location provided
4. if no artifact found look in the current contribution for an
artifact providing the appropriate namespace
5. if not found report an error
6. else do sca specific resolution
7. use the sca artifact resolution mechanism to find an artifact
providing the appropriate namespace
8. if not found report an error
So going by this process, if the artifact specified in the location
attribute is not found an error is reported either in Step 5 or 8.
I believe, TUSCANY-2906 has been re-opened with an expectation that, the
artifacts should be resolved even if the
location attribute points to an invalid location. I believe that brings
back the question which had in the past as posted here....
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg06028.html
Now, the question is that, should we allow the artifact (WSDL/XSD) to
get resolved even if the artifact specified in the location
attribute is not found anywhere after following the above process?
--
Thanks & Regards,
Ramkumar Ramalingam
