Ruwan When I created the Jobs I thought about this. But in fact a Job is just one type of startup, and I thought it might be confusing to mix Startups with Mediators. I see the inclusion of mediators at the top level as really a "legacy" of the original style of config we had - before we added proxys and registrys, etc.
However, I agree we could do it. Thoughts from others? Paul On 9/20/07, Ruwan Linton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > For the moment the configuration for the jobs seems to be like following; > > <definitions> > <startup> > <job ...../>* > </startup> > ...... > </definitions> > > The <startup> element is wrapping all the jobs. With compared to other > elements in the configuration like <sequence>, <endpoint> and all they are > top level elements even mediators can appear in the top level in which case > that collection is treated as the main sequence. So I propose to bring the > <jobs> element to the top level as follows; > > <definitions> > <registry ..../>? > <proxy .../>* > <sequence .../>* > <endpoint ..../>* > <job .../>* > <localEntry .../>* > (mediator)* > </definitions> > > If we do have multiple types of jobs then we can let the FactoryFinder to > handle that. Is there any particular reason that I am missing here? If not > shall we bring these jobs to the top level before 1.1 release? > > Thanks, > Ruwan > > -- > Ruwan Linton > http://www.wso2.org - "Oxygenating the Web Services Platform" -- Paul Fremantle Co-Founder and VP of Technical Sales, WSO2 OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
