tooling and service model

[Dan Diephouse <da...@envoisolutions.com>]

Has anyone started on refactoring the tooling to use the service model 
yet? Guillaume and I were talking about chatting a bit about WSDL2 & 
REST and I think it would be cool to add support for it. Its easy enough 
to start on the wsdl2->service model & service model -> wsdl2 
conversions, but we still need the tooling support.

If no one is doing anything with it, I may take a stab at some of it 
early next week.
Cheers,
- Dan

-- 
Dan Diephouse
(616) 971-2053
Envoi Solutions LLC
http://netzooid.com

Re: tooling and service model

[Dan Diephouse <da...@envoisolutions.com>]

James Mao wrote:

> Hi Dan,
>
>>
>> I would like to start a set of parallel tool modules. Say create a 
>> directory called tools2 and get things working there. Once we're 
>> ready we can work on switching the whole build to the new tools.
>
> The tools2 will include all the functions in cxf tools?

And more :-)

> and how long will it take? 

Depends on how fast we can type :-)

> and when we say switching you mean include porting all the unit tests 
> and system tests to the tools2? and also make demos work properly.
> So, your goal is to replace cxf tools with tools2?

Yes, yes, yes.

> or let user choose which one they want to use?

No.

> But i really have a question why we need to create another tools when 
> the current tools works perfectly fine?

Because they don't work fine. I believe we had this discussion before... 
Please see the previous threads on tooling.

If you want to try to refactor the current tools in place, I suppose we 
could try that. But its a pretty drastic change, so I don't really see a 
step-wise process to do it. I think it would be better to just write a 
second set of tools, then when they're ready switch everythign over and 
delete the old tools.

>>
>> I'm in the midst of refactoring this now. I probably won't get the 
>> code in until tomorrow though. I'll try to explain once I get it 
>> finished :-)
>>
> Cool, just make sure all the system tests and demos working properly.

I don't usually test demos when I do commits. That would really slow 
down the development process. If there is something in the demos that 
isn't covered in the tests, you should add it.

- Dan

-- 
Dan Diephouse
(616) 971-2053
Envoi Solutions LLC
http://netzooid.com

Re: tooling and service model

[James Mao <ja...@iona.com>]

Hi Dan,
>
> I would like to start a set of parallel tool modules. Say create a 
> directory called tools2 and get things working there. Once we're ready 
> we can work on switching the whole build to the new tools.
The tools2 will include all the functions in cxf tools? and how long 
will it take? and when we say switching you mean include porting all the 
unit tests and system tests to the tools2? and also make demos work 
properly.
So, your goal is to replace cxf tools with tools2? or let user choose 
which one they want to use?
But i really have a question why we need to create another tools when 
the current tools works perfectly fine?
>
> I'm in the midst of refactoring this now. I probably won't get the 
> code in until tomorrow though. I'll try to explain once I get it 
> finished :-)
>
Cool, just make sure all the system tests and demos working properly.

Cheers,
James.

Re: tooling and service model

[Dan Diephouse <da...@envoisolutions.com>]

James Mao wrote:

>
>> I don't think there is any sense in adding soap 1.2 to the current 
>> tool set if we're just going to rewrite it anyway. I'd just assume 
>> start on the new tools now.
>
> I'm also OK with totally refactoring as long as each commit will not 
> brake all the unit tests and all the system tests and all the demos. 
> And I think we'd better have a plan in advance.

I would like to start a set of parallel tool modules. Say create a 
directory called tools2 and get things working there. Once we're ready 
we can work on switching the whole build to the new tools.

>>
>> I was looking through this today, and I think it needs to change a 
>> little. Basically in the Dispatch we should be able to reuse the 
>> Client which contains all the message exchange logic - instead of 
>> duplicating it in Dispatch like we do now.
>
> Yes, i agree, i'm also thinking of reuse the code in the clientimpl, 
> but i haven't figure out a good way to reduce the code and also keep 
> the code simple.
> Any good suggestion?

I'm in the midst of refactoring this now. I probably won't get the code 
in until tomorrow though. I'll try to explain once I get it finished :-)

- Dan

-- 
Dan Diephouse
(616) 971-2053
Envoi Solutions LLC
http://netzooid.com

Re: tooling and service model

[James Mao <ja...@iona.com>]

> I don't think there is any sense in adding soap 1.2 to the current 
> tool set if we're just going to rewrite it anyway. I'd just assume 
> start on the new tools now.
I'm also OK with totally refactoring as long as each commit will not 
brake all the unit tests and all the system tests and all the demos. And 
I think we'd better have a plan in advance.
>
> I was looking through this today, and I think it needs to change a 
> little. Basically in the Dispatch we should be able to reuse the 
> Client which contains all the message exchange logic - instead of 
> duplicating it in Dispatch like we do now.
Yes, i agree, i'm also thinking of reuse the code in the clientimpl, but 
i haven't figure out a good way to reduce the code and also keep the 
code simple.
Any good suggestion?
>
>> Pretty much like the provider based RESTful service in JAX-WS RI.
>> For the provider based RESTful service, seems that there's no need to 
>> get the tools support REST. Can you provide other use cases which 
>> need tools support.
>
> WSDL 2 has an HTTP GET/PUT/POST/DELETE binding. This is the usecase 
> I'm working toward.

Cool
> I have some annotations & ideas I want to plan around with, so I'll 
> probably be doing some hacking here as well.
>
Jervis and I also discussed the annotation before, since there's no sepc 
around there, i think we can do that way.
Good news is that Jervis already got the provider based RESTful service 
working, so i guess we can claim that we have this feature in MS1.

Cheers,
James.

Re: tooling and service model

[Dan Diephouse <da...@envoisolutions.com>]

James Mao wrote:

> Hi Dan,
>
> Actually Tom and I already started working on that. and we will create 
> jira tasks, later you can review and comment on that.
> And i think WSDL2 is going to next Milestone, right? I think SOAP1.2 
> is more important than WSDL2 at moment.
>
I don't think there is any sense in adding soap 1.2 to the current tool 
set if we're just going to rewrite it anyway. I'd just assume start on 
the new tools now.

> I have finished the Dispatch/Provider with XML/HTTP support , and i 
> think Jervis have got the provider based RESTful service working, and 
> later he will add the demo to show how it works.

I was looking through this today, and I think it needs to change a 
little. Basically in the Dispatch we should be able to reuse the Client 
which contains all the message exchange logic - instead of duplicating 
it in Dispatch like we do now.

> Pretty much like the provider based RESTful service in JAX-WS RI.
> For the provider based RESTful service, seems that there's no need to 
> get the tools support REST. Can you provide other use cases which need 
> tools support.

WSDL 2 has an HTTP GET/PUT/POST/DELETE binding. This is the usecase I'm 
working toward.

> I know the provider based RESTful service is just a small start though.
>
I have some annotations & ideas I want to plan around with, so I'll 
probably be doing some hacking here as well.

Cheers,
- Dan

> Thanks,
> James.
>
> Dan Diephouse 写道:
>
>> Has anyone started on refactoring the tooling to use the service 
>> model yet? Guillaume and I were talking about chatting a bit about 
>> WSDL2 & REST and I think it would be cool to add support for it. Its 
>> easy enough to start on the wsdl2->service model & service model -> 
>> wsdl2 conversions, but we still need the tooling support.
>>
>> If no one is doing anything with it, I may take a stab at some of it 
>> early next week.
>> Cheers,
>> - Dan
>>
>


-- 
Dan Diephouse
(616) 971-2053
Envoi Solutions LLC
http://netzooid.com

Re: tooling and service model

[James Mao <ja...@iona.com>]

Hi Dan,

Actually Tom and I already started working on that. and we will create 
jira tasks, later you can review and comment on that.
And i think WSDL2 is going to next Milestone, right? I think SOAP1.2 is 
more important than WSDL2 at moment.

I have finished the Dispatch/Provider with XML/HTTP support , and i 
think Jervis have got the provider based RESTful service working, and 
later he will add the demo to show how it works.
Pretty much like the provider based RESTful service in JAX-WS RI.
For the provider based RESTful service, seems that there's no need to 
get the tools support REST. Can you provide other use cases which need 
tools support.
I know the provider based RESTful service is just a small start though.

Thanks,
James.

Dan Diephouse 写道:
> Has anyone started on refactoring the tooling to use the service model 
> yet? Guillaume and I were talking about chatting a bit about WSDL2 & 
> REST and I think it would be cool to add support for it. Its easy 
> enough to start on the wsdl2->service model & service model -> wsdl2 
> conversions, but we still need the tooling support.
>
> If no one is doing anything with it, I may take a stab at some of it 
> early next week.
> Cheers,
> - Dan
>