Hi Simon,

The JIRA issue can be found at:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2220

Cheers,

Dave.

On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 3:37 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 7:51 AM, Dave Sowerby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> wrote:
>
>  > Hey Simon,
>  >
>  > Thanks for the response.
>  >
>  > Indeed this is a change in Tuscany behaviour - using the same service
>  > running under 1.0-incubating or 1.1-incubating the WSDL generated is
>  > as expected.  This problem only appears to have started recently with
>  > 1.2.
>  >
>  > Cheers,
>  >
>  > Dave.
>  >
>  > On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 10:40 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  > wrote:
>  > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Dave Sowerby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  > >  wrote:
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >  > Hi,
>  > >  >
>  > >  > I'm currently facing issues when attmepting to utilise the wsdl
>  > >  > generated by a service exposed using binding.ws, when I use wsdl2java
>  > >  > with this wsdl I get the following exception:
>  > >  >
>  > >  > IWAB0399E Error in generating Java from WSDL:  java.io.IOException:
>  > >  > Emitter failure.  Cannot find endpoint address in port
>  > >  > ServiceRequestPortType__SOAPHTTPPort in service
>  > >  > ServiceRequestPortType__ServiceLocator
>  > >  >    java.io.IOException: Emitter failure.  Cannot find endpoint
>  > >  > address in port ServiceRequestPortType__SOAPHTTPPort in service
>  > >  > ServiceRequestPortType__ServiceLocator
>  > >  >    at
>  > >  >
>  > 
> org.apache.axis.wsdl.toJava.JavaServiceImplWriter.writeFileBody(JavaServiceImplWriter.java:189)
>  > >  >    at
>  > org.apache.axis.wsdl.toJava.JavaWriter.generate(JavaWriter.java:127)
>  > >  >    at
>  > >  >
>  > 
> org.apache.axis.wsdl.toJava.JavaServiceWriter.generate(JavaServiceWriter.java:112)
>  > >  >    at
>  > >  >
>  > 
> org.apache.axis.wsdl.toJava.JavaGeneratorFactory$Writers.generate(JavaGeneratorFactory.java:421)
>  > >  >    at org.apache.axis.wsdl.gen.Parser.generate(Parser.java:476)
>  > >  >    at org.apache.axis.wsdl.gen.Parser.access$000(Parser.java:45)
>  > >  >    at
>  > org.apache.axis.wsdl.gen.Parser$WSDLRunnable.run(Parser.java:362)
>  > >  >    at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
>  > >  >
>  > >  > I've diffed a previously functioning wsdl against the currently
>  > (RC3a)
>  > >  > generated wsdl file, the difference causing this problem appears to
>  > be
>  > >  > the additional lines of:
>  > >  >
>  > >  >  <wsdl:service name="ServiceRequestPortType__Service">
>  > >  >    <wsdl:port name="ServiceRequestPortType__SOAPHTTPPort"
>  > >  > binding="ns2:ServiceRequestPortType__SOAPBinding">
>  > >  >    </wsdl:port>
>  > >  >  </wsdl:service>
>  > >  >
>  > >  > Which without an address is causing wsdl2java to fail.
>  > >  >
>  > >  > Has anyone seen this before?  Or does anyone have any suggestions?
>  > >  >
>  > >  > Cheers,
>  > >  >
>  > >  > Dave.
>  > >  >
>  > >  > --
>  > >  > Dave Sowerby MEng MBCS
>  > >  >
>  > >  > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  > >  > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  > >  > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  > >  >
>  > >  >
>  > >  Hi Dave
>  > >
>  > >  I don't have an immediate suggestion so I'd like to understand if this
>  > is a
>  > >  change in behavior in the Tuscany code that you are now seeing. I.e.
>  > The
>  > >  previously functioning WSDL that you diffed against. Was that also
>  > generated
>  > >  by Tuscany in the past? If so I'll go look at what changed and why.
>  > >
>  > >  As an aside I saw a post from Simon Nash saying that he is looking at
>  > the
>  > >  WSDL generation story afresh so hopefully we can make this runtime vs
>  > >  development story much more consistent.
>  > >
>  > >  Regards
>  > >
>  > >  Simon
>  > >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > --
>  > Dave Sowerby MEng MBCS
>  >
>  > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  >
>  >
>  Dave
>
>  As this effect seems to be erroneous in several ways and is different from
>  1.1 can you raise a high priority JIRA so we can track it.
>
>  Thanks
>
>  Simon
>



-- 
Dave Sowerby MEng MBCS

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to