Ive have extensively implemented DOM4j based Axiom specifically:
<groupId>org.apache.ws.commons.axiom</groupId>
<artifactId>axiom</artifactId>
<name>Axiom</name>
<version>1.2.9-SNAPSHOT</version> I have'nt seen any matrix detailing the
capabilities of axiom-woden vs axiom-dom4j so I cannot say dropping woden would
impact future Axiom implementationsbut it does seem like a duplication of
effort to support both OM implementations Is there a matrix available to
illustrate features and functions capabilities of axiom-woden vs
axiom-dom4j?Martin------------------------------------
Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene Empfaenger
sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte Weiterleitung
oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht dient lediglich dem
Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine rechtliche Bindungswirkung.
Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung
fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.
> Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 14:12:38 -0400
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [WODEN] Future of Woden Axiom implementation ?
>
> What is the status of WSDL 2.0 ? how many WS stacks use WSDL 2.0 ?.
>
> Deepal
> > Hi Devs,
> >
> > I'm thinking about future of Axiom (OM) based implementation of Woden
> > API for sometime, whether we should continue or drop support from next
> > release ?
> >
> > AFAIK original objective of OM implementation is to support Axis2 but
> > in fact Axis2 never used OM implementation instead Axis2 still use DOM
> > based implementation. Also in my POV there is no such drawbacks with
> > DOM implementation to move Axis2 to use OM implementation. At the
> > moment there is no clear indication about users of OM implementation
> > too. In this situation it is kind of a overhead to maintain OM
> > implementation further specially with small number of developers. At
> > the beginning Woden had plans for number of cool features such as
> > supporting to both WSDL versions etc, but all original developers have
> > been disappeared from the community few years ago hence it's seem OK
> > to re-prioritize objectives based on current requirements and
> > resources.
> >
> > This also important decision to reduce complexities among Woden
> > artifacts, at the moment it's required to have at least 3 JAR files
> > to use Woden framework as woden-api, woden-impl-common and
> > woden-impl-dom/woden-impl-om. Dropping OM implementation allows to
> > merge these artifacts and deliver above 3 module as a single JAR file
> > called woden.jar. IMO this kind of single artifact deliverables are
> > more natural for utility projects and easy to deploy on OGSI
> > containers too.
> >
> > Personally I don't have energy to maintain both implementations, also
> > without actual users no point to maintain OM implementation further.
> > Based on above facts I would like to suggest terminate OM support from
> > next release and move forward the project with what ever the useful
> > features.
> >
> > Any thoughts ?
> >
> >
> > Thanks !
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
