DO NOT REPLY [Bug 9075] - [PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components

2003-01-22 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9075

[PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components

[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED



--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2003-01-22 16:28 ---
Tested and verified, everything works fine :)

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 9075] - [PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components

2003-01-17 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9075

[PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components

[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED



--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2003-01-17 11:46 
---
Added to 2.1 -- please check and close bug report

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 9075] - [PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components

2003-01-13 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9075

[PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2003-01-13 23:27 ---
> I've looked at the code and have a number of questions / comments:
Here we go :)

> 
> why do all instance variables have a "m_" prefix ? Perhaps it 
> would be more
> obvious if instead the "this." qualifier is used?
fixed.

> 
> RfcTransfomer
> 
>   setup()
>   uses exception to detect non-existing configuration - using 
> a default value would be better
Yes intended. I want the user to know which configuration currently is
used. This is only for visibility. Shall i change it?

> 
>   configure()
>   just keeps reference to configuration - parsing should be 
> done here so that it
> is (a) more obvious and (b) occurs only once
fixed.

> 
>   startElement()
>   many String.equals() - would it be better to load a HashMap 
> with element names
> and use a
>   switch statement?
done, looks much better now :)

>   in finally - unconditional release of selector (could be null)
Do you mean the Web3DataSourceSelector or the ComponentManager? I
thought the ComponentManager can handle null's.?

> 
>   debug()-calls are not conditional - should be 
> if(getLogger().isDebugEnabled())
> getLogger().debug(...)
fixed.

> 
>   characters()
>   m_fillMe.setValue() does not throw an exception (at least 
> not mock class) - why is there a try-catch block around?
mock updated, i missed the ConversionException

>   why does streamer not use avalon IOW why is the 
> classloading done manually and not based on avalon components?
Ok. Here we go. Now a standard CS is used. Therefore i implemented
a DefaultWeb3Streamer as i already have done before :( but thought
it would be to much overhead. Well now this has got a nice real
CS and i know how to use the excalibur standard.

> 
> 
> Web3DataSource
> 
>   interface implements ThreadSafe - why? In general it is 
> considered bad to enforce an execution style in an interface
Ok. I've done it away.

> 
> Web3DataSourceSelector
> 
>   why is this emtpy interface necessary?
> (My knowledge here is limited, so forgive if this is a dumb one)
Ok, it isn't necessary, i'm the dumb one.

> 
> 
> Web3DataSourceSelectorImpl
> 
>   configure()
>   select() does lazy initialization. OK. Would be nice to put 
> that into an extra 
>   method, though, so that it would be more obvious.
>   How does this selector different from the already existing 
> selectors?
This is the thing with SAP and the JavaConnector. The JCO brings
a robust and ready to work pooling implementation. You can establish
multiple pools to multiple backends at the same time. The DataSource
itself stays the same implementation that does the work right now.

But to have a mechanism obvious to the user i wanted to bring the
process of selecting a specific backend into this component. Maybe
an example would help.

Say you have a webapp that uses a CRM and a R/3 backend. You will
go to define the connections in the xconf and give both backends
a characteristic name, say 'crm' and 'accounting'.
Now in the pipeline you have to decide against which backend the
RFC has to go.
Here you have to `select` the right connection(-pool).

Does this clarify the cirumstances?

> 
> 
> Web3DataSourceImpl
>   client pool: if a new client is requested, a new instance 
> is created. With a pool
>   this should not be necessary if there are released clients
> Am I missing something?
Puh, you're right, did get it in mind now. It's for historical
reasons but no longer needed. Now avalon does the work all over.

Thanks for advice
Michael

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 9075] - [PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components

2003-01-13 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9075

[PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2003-01-13 23:27 ---
Created an attachment (id=4412)
additions

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 9075] - [PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components

2003-01-08 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9075

[PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2003-01-08 08:59 
---
Michael, 
I've looked at the code and have a number of questions / comments:

why do all instance variables have a "m_" prefix ? Perhaps it would be more
obvious if instead the "this." qualifier is used?

RfcTransfomer

setup()
uses exception to detect non-existing configuration - using a default value
would be better

configure()
just keeps reference to configuration - parsing should be done here so that it
is (a) more obvious and (b) occurs only once

startElement()
many String.equals() - would it be better to load a HashMap with element names
and use a
switch statement?
in finally - unconditional release of selector (could be null)

debug()-calls are not conditional - should be if(getLogger().isDebugEnabled())
getLogger().debug(...)

characters()
m_fillMe.setValue() does not throw an exception (at least not mock class) - 
why is
there a try-catch block around?
why does streamer not use avalon IOW why is the classloading done manually and
not based on avalon components?


Web3DataSource

interface implements ThreadSafe - why? In general it is considered bad to
enforce an
execution style in an interface

Web3DataSourceSelector

why is this emtpy interface necessary?
(My knowledge here is limited, so forgive if this is a dumb one)


Web3DataSourceSelectorImpl

configure()
select() does lazy initialization. OK. Would be nice to put that into an extra 
method, though, so that it would be more obvious.
How does this selector different from the already existing selectors?


Web3DataSourceImpl
client pool: if a new client is requested, a new instance is created. With a 
pool
this should not be necessary if there are released clients
Am I missing something?

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 9075] - [PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components

2002-12-29 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9075

[PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2002-12-29 22:11 ---
The current attachment encludes 

. a brief description of the markup-syntax
. a sample pipeline
. refactored and mock'ed code (which should also compile without the original 
jco.jar file)
. the standard apache lizense

- Michael

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 9075] - [PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components

2002-12-29 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9075

[PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2002-12-29 22:07 ---
Created an attachment (id=4283)
Mocks, Refacroeing, Description

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 9075] - [PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components

2002-12-18 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9075

[PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2002-12-18 11:06 
---
Michael,
I'm willing to work on your contribution. It seems that the code depends on
classes from SAP. That per se is not a problem. But we need at least a chance to
compile this and see if it is syntactically correct.
Are those needed jars available from SAP (without purchasing the product) or
could you come up with mock classes like Nicola did for weblogic components in
the jsp block?
Chris.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 9075] - [PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components

2002-12-17 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9075

[PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2002-12-17 17:27 ---
Currently I cannot supply more information but i will walk it through 
as i strongly want to see the packages in 2.1 Alpha.

Michael

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 9075] - [PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components

2002-12-17 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9075

[PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2002-12-17 17:25 ---
Created an attachment (id=4207)
A strong enhanced version prepared to obey the upcoming block syntax

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 9075] - [PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components

2002-06-04 Thread bugzilla 

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9075

[PATCH] Contribution of SAP R/3(r) connectivity components

[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|web3-core   |[PATCH] Contribution of SAP
   ||R/3(r) connectivity
   ||components

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]