Jim Marino wrote: > > 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.
Sounds good. Dims has on a couple occasions invited me to get involved with Axis2, which is a fine idea, but I'm not sure why non-SOAP bindings such as JMS (or File, Email, etc) have to be integrated into Tuscany via a SOAP stack. Or am I misunderstanding what Axis2 is bringing to the table as far as Tuscany is concerned? -- Jack Unrue [EMAIL PROTECTED]
