Just a quick question (actually two)
- Is there an open implementation of the BSF framework
(found a reference in the xml-soap code).
- What is the correct XMI version ? (for a checkout
of current from cvs). I get a couple of private/public
moans:
[javac]
Noticed that the dist and build targets of xml-soap are a bit different
than for example for the serveletapi and for the tomcat-3.2 code. For
soap they go into
TOP/xml-soap/java/dist/
and for the other projects they go into
TOP/dist//...
which is kind of convenient. Any re
Troubleshooting/FAQ (for tomcat - but I guess for all servers) based on
recent experience and culling the mailinglist/google:
When testing to see if your rcprouter is up
Why does:
java org.apache.soap.server.ServiceManagerClient \
http://localhost:8080/soap/servlet/rpc
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Scott Nichol wrote:
> Section 6.2 of SOAP 1.1 states
>
>
> SOAP HTTP follows the semantics of the HTTP Status codes for communicating
> status information in HTTP. For example, a 2xx status code indicates that
> the client's request including the SOAP component was succ
On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Michael J Lewis wrote:
> The list is becoming ridiculous. To not deal with basic validation
> (someone not available) but to continue spamming out emails .
- the mail relay on the other end is posting as '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' and
fully spoofs the from/sender and envelop
Would this not just boil down not hav ing multi-ref's in this implementation;
Axis has those.
Dw.
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Soumen Sarkar wrote:
> Does it take care of cycles in object graph to be serialized. Apache SOAP
> serializer
> does not. It runs out of stack. Please consider the following j
On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Andrew Simpson wrote:
> I have tried repeatedly to unsubscribe from this list, and received
> acknowledgements, but still receive the messages.
That means you are subscribed under a second/different email address.
Check the header (full header) of the message you received
On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, Ted Leung wrote:
> We ask each subproject to nominate 1 (or 2) people from that project to
> be a part of the XML PMC. From my experience, I think that it will be
> better to have 2 people rather than one in order to share workload, etc.
Another task we need nominees for (
ct that we do do peer review and
oversight; and that it we're not a collection of one mans shops.
Dw
--
Dirk-Willem van Gulik, President of the Apache Software Foundation.
