On Sep 5, 2007, at 10:30 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
My expectation is that Harmony would be using CXF (or Axis, though I
obviously would prefer they use CXF since CXF is already standalone
JAX-WS certified compliant) for the WebServices stuff they need. I
don't see why they would write another webservices stack. Or are you
suggesting that CXF also get merged into Harmony? Are we following
Sun's lead and jamming all the projects into the JRE? That doesn't
make sense to me.
I wasn't suggesting that CXF get merged into Harmony, or at least
didn't mean too ;-) If it makes sense to move the bindings to CXF
that would be fine with me. The only concern I would have is that
the tooling should be transparent enough that CXF isn't the only
solution.
Also, the WebServices stuff Harmony needs definitely does NOT
include a
CORBA binding for the JAX-WS stuff. That isn't part of the specs
they
need. Thus, it really doesn't make sense to me to put that part
there.
The commiters that have contributed to the binding since Jan are:
bravi
dmiddlem
enolan
mvescovi - 2 commits to add a couple tests and 1 commit to fix a build
failure
rickmcguire - 3 commits related to mvn build things (release preps)
dblevins - 1 commit related to continuum setup
lkuehne - 1 commit to apply a patch from JIRA
adc - just some maven build things
If you add the tooling that goes with the binding (idl2wsdl,
wsdl2idl),
then mvescovi and lkuehne have a few more. (Note, there isn't a idlj
tool, so your mention of that is relatively irrelevant. There is a
start of a pre-processor in the tools module that would be the first
part of a idlj, but that's it.) In anycase, from the bindings
part, it
would just be the 3 or 5 of them, depending on if they are
interested or
not. (we'd obviously give them a chance to opt-out if they want).
I was following up on an earlier e-mail on this topic but you
provided more detail here. Again, I thre out the strawman to get the
discussion going so please think of this as a stream of
conciousness. My experience is if someone says we should do
something no one comments. If one says let's do this then everyone
has an opinion and we move forward. If the Yoko project committers
prefer the division then I'm fine with it. As you know the challenge
with a lot of this is inter-project dependency when trying to release
but that's a problem no matter where we put stuff so...
--
J. Daniel Kulp
Principal Engineer
IONA
P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.dankulp.com/blog
