On Sep 21, 2006, at 5:22 PM, Jim Marino wrote:
On Sep 21, 2006, at 1:23 PM, Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi, Jim.
I'm preparing the move now, basically refining the code and
adding more test cases.
For package names, I'm thinking of the following:
org.apache.tuscany.spi.databinding (DataBinding SPIs)
org.apache.tuscany.spi.databinding.extension (DataBinding related
base classes for extensibility)
org.apache.tuscany.core.databinding (Core DataBinding
implementations)
org.apache.tuscany.core.databinding.xml (Other simple
databindings and transformers, for DOM, StAX, SAX, I/O etc)
Just to be clear, I only think the base databinding framework
should go in core (I think that is what you have in mind) -e.g.
JAXB, Castor, SDO, etc. would still be service extensions.
+1
BTW, we will need to add "idl/wsdl" as a dependency to the core
for the databinding part.
I guess we have to put that in right? It would be nice if we
didn't but it may be something that has to be done.
Why would we? I can see adding interfaces to spi to support IDL
implementations but wsdl (and java) should just be an implementation
of those interfaces.
--
Jeremy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
