In the past (Ode 1.3.5 and earlier) you could set the soap:address location in the BPEL project's wsdl to "http://[server]:[port]/ode/processes/HelloWorld"; and, when the project is deployed, the wsdl generated for the process could be accessed with the URL http://localhost:8080/ode/processes/HelloWorld?wsdl (the port might we different depending on the server's configuration). You can see this in the attachments in my original email. This no longer works in 1.3.6. It appears the substitution mechanism is broken. The server and port must be hardcoded in the project's wsdl. If the server and port are hardcoded than you can still access the process with the old URL. Perhaps this is broken with the Axis2 upgrade. Curious if anyone else relied on this substitution mechanism or even knew it existed?
-----Original Message----- From: Sathwik B P [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, November 4, 2013 11:25 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: problem with generated wsdl in Ode 1.3.6 Hi Less, The way to access the WSDL of deployed processes is though this URL http://localhost:8080/ode/deployment/services/ (host:port could be different as per your deployment) Axis2 WSDL: This will point to the URL to access the WSDL of the deployed process. regards, sathwik On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 4:13 AM, Les Spivey <[email protected]>wrote: > Hello All. I've been trying out the latest version of Ode - 1.3.6 - > and it doesn't appear to generate the wsdl's the same as 1.3.5. I'm > running Ode in Tomcat 7.0.26. I'm using the apache-ode-war > distributions from > here: http://ode.staging.apache.org/getting-ode.html. I've attached a > simple HelloWorld BPEL project (HelloWorld.zip). I've attached the > wsdl files generated after deployment, one for Ode 1.3.5 and one for Ode > 1.3.6. > You'll notice the 1.3.6 version does not contain the port elements > under the service nor does it contain the bindings. The 1.3.6 wsdl is > not useable by tools like SoapUI. Is there some setting involved to > get the new version of Ode (Axis2) to generate the wsdl correctly? Is > this change intentional and, if so, how is the new version of the wsdl used? > > > > Thanks, Les. >
