ant elder wrote:
On Nov 13, 2007 11:02 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Nov 9, 2007 7:05 PM, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1 for Simon Laws as the release manager.
+1 on Simon Nash's proposal to have an early-January 1.1 release.
I would like to get some basic transaction support into the 1.1 release.
Thanks,
Raymond
----- Original Message -----
From: "Simon Nash" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 4:07 AM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Java SCA Release 1.1 was: Re: Re: [DISCUSS]
Tuscany
SCA Roadmap and next releases
+1 for Simon as RM.
I added a few things to the list that I'd like to get done for 1.1.
I think the distribution/packaging changes for better modularity and
daployability are very important and I'd like to see these in 1.1.
I think it's more realistic to aim for an early January release date
rather than trying to get something out in December just before the
holidays. Also, December releases tend not to get immediate pickup
and adoption because of people being out for the holidays.
Simon
ant elder wrote:
On Nov 5, 2007 3:54 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/23/07, wang feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
hi Jean-Sebastien,
Please see my comments below.
Thanks,
wangfeng
On 2007-10-20, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
wang feng wrote:
Hi all,
We have used Tuscany 1.0 in our product and found some features is
important to us.
Thanks a lot for contributing here and helping us understand what
you'd
like to see in Tuscany!
I have a few questions to make sure I understand what you're
looking
for.
- Support hot deployable on contribution and composite.
This should be have a recursive algorithm to update the correlated
component when it has been referenced.
Can you give a brief description of the type of hot deployment that
you're trying to support? It does not have to be very detailed but
maybe
just an outline or an example showing what your contributions and
composites look like and the steps that you'd like to go through to
redeploy them.
In particular I'd like to understand if you want to redeploy
imported
contributions (imported by <import> in sca-contribution.xml),
nested
composites, and what you'd like to be able to update in the
contributions and composites, classes? component configuration?
bindings? wiring? etc.
My use case like that(there are three contributions):
contribution A export composite A,
contribution B import composite A used by composite B and export
composite
B,
contribution C import composite B
If we update composite A in contribution A,the sca runtime should be
update the correlated contribution B and C and the component's
relationship should be rewiring.
- Support SDO namespace when using websservice.
Deploy a service to webservice,a schema file used in SDO and have
sdo
namespace such as commonj.sdo/java or commonj.sdo/xml,we should
support
the feature when parsing the wsdl.
Could you provide an example WSDL and XSD?
My wsdl file like this:
<wsdl:definitions xmlns:apachesoap="http://xml.apache.org/xml-soap";
xmlns:sdoJava="commonj.sdo/java" xmlns:soapenc="
http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"; xmlns:tns="
http://com.primeton.eos/com/primeton/eos/newcomponent"; xmlns:wsdl="
http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/"; xmlns:wsdlsoap="
http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/soap/"; xmlns:xsd="
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"; targetNamespace="
http://com.primeton.eos/com/primeton/eos/newcomponent";>
<wsdl:types>
<schema xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
targetNamespace="
http://com.primeton.eos/com/primeton/eos/newcomponent";>
<import namespace="
http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/
"/>
<complexType name="SdoJava_java_util_List"
sdoJava:instanceClass="java.util.List"/>
<complexType name="ArrayOf_soapenc_string">
<complexContent>
<restriction base="soapenc:Array">
<attribute ref="soapenc:arrayType"
wsdl:arrayType="soapenc:string[]"/>
</restriction>
</complexContent>
</complexType>
<complexType name="SdoJava_java_lang_String"
sdoJava:instanceClass="java.lang.String"/>
<complexType name="SdoJava_stockquote_StockQuoteService"
sdoJava:instanceClass="stockquote.StockQuoteService"/>
<complexType
name="ArrayOf_soapenc_stockquote_StockQuoteService">
<complexContent>
<restriction base="soapenc:Array">
<attribute ref="soapenc:arrayType"
wsdl:arrayType="tns:SdoJava_stockquote_StockQuoteService[]"/>
</restriction>
</complexContent>
</complexType>
</schema>
</wsdl:types>
<wsdl:message name="newcomponent.newbiz1OutputMessage">
<wsdl:part name="out1" type="xsd:string"></wsdl:part>
<wsdl:part name="out2" type="xsd:string"></wsdl:part>
</wsdl:message>
<wsdl:message name="newcomponent.newbiz1InputMessage">
<wsdl:part name="param1"
type="tns:ArrayOf_soapenc_stockquote_StockQuoteService"></wsdl:part>
<wsdl:part name="param2" type="xsd:string"></wsdl:part>
</wsdl:message>
<wsdl:message name="newcomponent.newbiz.bizxOutputMessage">
<wsdl:part name="out1"
type="tns:SdoJava_java_lang_String"></wsdl:part>
</wsdl:message>
<wsdl:message name="newcomponent.newbiz.bizxInputMessage">
<wsdl:part name="param1"
type="tns:SdoJava_java_util_List"></wsdl:part>
<wsdl:part name="param2"
type="tns:ArrayOf_soapenc_string"></wsdl:part>
</wsdl:message>
<wsdl:portType name="newcomponent">
<wsdl:operation name="newbiz">
<wsdl:input message="tns:
newcomponent.newbiz.bizxInputMessage
"></wsdl:input>
<wsdl:output message="tns:
newcomponent.newbiz.bizxOutputMessage"></wsdl:output>
</wsdl:operation>
<wsdl:operation name="newbiz1">
<wsdl:input message="tns:
newcomponent.newbiz1InputMessage
"></wsdl:input>
<wsdl:output message="tns:
newcomponent.newbiz1OutputMessage
"></wsdl:output>
</wsdl:operation>
</wsdl:portType>
</wsdl:definitions>
When I use the wsdl file to describe a service's interface,the
console
show a warning as below.
[WARNING] Component service interface incompatible with service
interface:
test/HelloInterfaceImpl null
- Support load contribution as a osgi bundle.
Are you looking for something different from the OSGi bundle
contribution support already in the 1.0 release (as in
itest/itest-contribution-osgi for example)?
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
I meaned that the sca runtime should be run in a osgi runtime and
the
classloader should be different for every contribution.
I have already found there were some discussion on the mail list.
Thanks,
wangfeng
--
Jean-Sebastien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Now that 1.0.1 is well on the way I'd like to suggest that we start
to
think about our next feature release (1.1). I just had a look back at
the
roadmap page that Raymond created [1] and tried to mark things that
I'd
seen
going past on the the mail list either as done or as being worked on.
We
need to decide what we want in and when we want to get the release
out.
There's a lot left on the list and also items that have been raised
on
the
list since the page was created and in the spirit of trying to get us
in
the
right shape to get a release done I'd like to volunteer as the
release
manager.
Regards
Simon
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/Roadmap+Discussion
+1 to the 1.1 release and for Simon as RM.
What sort of time frame are you thinking? There's a few things I'd
like
to
try get in 1.1 but the main one would be the JMS binding and it will
probably take at least a few weeks to get that ready.
...ant
...ant
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OK, I think it's a reasonable point about the release getting lost in
the
holidays. However if we don't get the content for the release done before
Christmas then my worry is that the actual release will slip out until
February, as is the way with these things.
So if people favour announcing the release in January how about we look to
see if we can get the content done before we all go on holiday. We then
complete the voting process and announce the release early in January?
Can we get some idea what from the list [1] has to be in? I've put some
thumbs up on the things I'm interested in and think I will have time to
work
on before I go away for the holidays. Can you all do the same?
Regards
Simon
[1]
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/Roadmap+Discussion
Its good to release often and its already about 6 weeks since the
1.0release so ideally we'd be doing a release about *now*. The longer
its left
the harder it becomes and the more work it takes to pull the release
together, waiting till January seems too long to me so i'd still favor going
for the pre-Christmas 1.1 release.
...ant
We are doing a release about *now". It's 1.0.1.
Every time we do a release we have to close down active development
threads, bring everythng together at a consistent level, and go into a
review cycle to get the release up to a decent quality level.
Given that we have only just completed this exercise for 1.0.1, I think
we need at least 4 weeks of solid development before we close down and
go into the next of these consolidate and review cycles. This is
consistent with having the release candidate available before Christmas
and actually releasing it in early January.
Simon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
