Sure, no problem. And thanks :-)

On 7/5/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Thanks Matthieu

   I'm little overbooked these days, but let me see if I could try to
look into the resolution thing over the weekend. Is that OK ?

On 7/5/07, Matthieu Riou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I've done a few additional stuff on the BPEL implementation allowing a
BPEL
> file to be compiled by ODE upon deployment. The implementation is
therefore
> created and initialized with most of what would be needed by the
runtime.
> However there's still a couple of problems with resolution and finding
my
> way inside Tuscany code isn't that easy.
>
> To resolve the WSDL implemented by the process I've been trying to go
> through the resolution mechanism and declare the implementation I return
in
> the read() method of the processor as unresolved. However the resolve()
> method is never called afterward and this results in a
NullPointerException
> in Tuscany as the InterfaceContract is never set. From what I could make
out
> of the code, it seems that the resolution mechanism happens for
Interface
> processors but not of implementations, but I could be wrong.
>
> I've created a patch that adds the BPEL compilation and demonstrates the
> problem using the test case. Please have a look at
> BPELImplementationProcessor, you'll see how the implementation is built.
> You'll also see that the BPEL file from now is directly loaded using an
> additional "file" attribute. Ideally that should go as well to use the
same
> type of resolving as for the WSDL (when it will work).
>
> Some help regarding this would be definitely welcome...
>
> Thanks,
> Matthieu
>


--
Luciano Resende
Apache Tuscany Committer
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/

Reply via email to