Paul / Ruwan
However, I agree we could do it. Thoughts from others?
Well.. when we finalized the config language syntax, we had a top level
"definitions" and then one or more "proxy", "sequence", "endpoint" etc
definitions. So I guess the "job" definitions should be handled the same
for consistency.
asankha
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"
