Hi Jack,
No problem that you are not Lance ;) I think a JMS binding would be
great. One of the work items we need to do is to figure out a new
binding strategy, particularly as we migrate to Axis2. I think it
would be a good idea to also validate this against a JMS binding. I
have the start of some ideas for that I'll post to the list so we can
begin discussion. I think the binding work can be done in parallel to
some of the changes we are making in the proxy/wire/invocation/
builder layer. So, when I'll try and write up those thoughts and we
can discuss in more detail.
Jim
On Feb 9, 2006, at 12:26 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jim Marino wrote:
There is some documentation on the design in my sandbox
although I realize this needs to be beefed up a lot. We
definitely want it to be easy for you to ramp up (my apologies
for the project being somewhat in a state of flux at the moment).
I thought a way to do this would be if there were specific areas
from Sebastien's list or my additions that interest you - I'd be
happy to work with you on those and I know others would be as
well. Is there a specific thing you saw from Sebastien's list
you would like to explore?
Hi Jim. I'm not Lance :-) but this is a good time for me to speak
up. In the past I made a vague comment about being interested
in external services (I think I mentioned JMS specifically),
but Jean-Sebastien's list mentions several items that I think
can help out with:
- support for subsystem SCDL
- ModuleComponents only no externalService and entryPoint at the
subsystem level
- Support for wiring/specifying endpoints on externalServices
- Support for overriding properties of moduleComponents
So my first question is, does someone have a slightly more
detailed work list for the above (or perhaps that too needs
to be done)? And secondly, is progress on these items contingent
on some other stuff that is in-progress or yet to be started,
such as your comment, Jim, about migrating to a new context
architecture? I'm assuming that the current discussions in the
spec working group, while definitely relevant, are just a tad
over the horizon as far as the timeline for this stuff is
concerned.
Thanks.
--
Jack Unrue
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
