You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to java-dev@axis.apache.org by Deepal jayasinghe <de...@gmail.com> on 2008/05/05 14:07:46 UTC
[Axis2] Merging Kernel and JWS-API
Hi all,
When I was removing annogen dependency I realized that importance of
moving JWS-API into the kernel. The reason is that those classes are
used many places in Axis2, so having them in the kernel is much easier
than adding one more dependency to JWS-API.
Thoughts ... ?
Thank you!
Deepal
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [Axis2] Merging Kernel and JWS-API
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Deepal,
Only way to override the JDK classes is by the endorsed directory mechanism :( Give me a day or so to think about this.
thanks,
dims
Deepal jayasinghe wrote:
| Hi Dims,
|> Deepal,
|>
|> If you are talking about jws-api maven module...Please don't do that!.
|> The effort is to let Axis2 kernel work with the
|> version in the JDK if there's one. (Example new JDK 1.6 updates has
|> these classes built-in).
| Oh , I understand. So in JDK 1.6 we do not need dependency to jws-api ?
| , how about if we have the class in the class path. Then I think it will
| load JDK classes first and ignore jws class from Axis2. So IMO whether
| those classes are there on kernel or in a separate module make no sense
| at the runtime.
|
| -Deepal
|
|
| ---------------------------------------------------------------------
| To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
| For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin)
iD8DBQFIIFkLgNg6eWEDv1kRAuHpAKDUZf9kOpzYoIL3Z55iMgqAB3P2JACg3e6a
2P1INCmlVgWZRfFX/4CEDUY=
=DE5t
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [Axis2] Merging Kernel and JWS-API
Posted by Deepal jayasinghe <de...@gmail.com>.
Hi Dims,
> Deepal,
>
> If you are talking about jws-api maven module...Please don't do that!.
> The effort is to let Axis2 kernel work with the
> version in the JDK if there's one. (Example new JDK 1.6 updates has
> these classes built-in).
Oh , I understand. So in JDK 1.6 we do not need dependency to jws-api ?
, how about if we have the class in the class path. Then I think it will
load JDK classes first and ignore jws class from Axis2. So IMO whether
those classes are there on kernel or in a separate module make no sense
at the runtime.
-Deepal
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [Axis2] Merging Kernel and JWS-API
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Deepal,
If you are talking about jws-api maven module...Please don't do that!. The effort is to let Axis2 kernel work with the
version in the JDK if there's one. (Example new JDK 1.6 updates has these classes built-in).
thanks,
dims
Deepal jayasinghe wrote:
| Hi all,
| When I was removing annogen dependency I realized that importance of
| moving JWS-API into the kernel. The reason is that those classes are
| used many places in Axis2, so having them in the kernel is much easier
| than adding one more dependency to JWS-API.
|
| Thoughts ... ?
|
| Thank you!
| Deepal
| ---------------------------------------------------------------------
| To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
| For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin)
iD8DBQFIHwVMgNg6eWEDv1kRAkR1AKDLTZ0ePgLT4szmCIpLf4L4U/JOqACcCfII
2EoyLQVNRImUjlMNttsNLno=
=spKZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [Axis2] Merging Kernel and JWS-API
Posted by Jarek Gawor <jg...@gmail.com>.
Alright, I'm done with the move:
o The jws-api module was replaced by geronimo-ws-metadata_2.0_spec-1.1.2.jar.
o The saaj-api module was replaced by geronimo-saaj_1.3_spec-1.0.0.jar.
o The contents of the jaxws-api module were copied to
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/geronimo/specs/trunk/geronimo-jaxws_2.1_spec/.
I published a snapshot of it and removed the jaxws-api module from
Axis2. I'll try to release the geronimo-jaxws_2.1_spec module after a
few days (assuming everything is cool).
Let me know if there are any problems,
Jarek
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 4:31 PM, Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> sounds good!
>
> Jarek Gawor wrote:
> | Ok. I'll start working on it. For jws-api and saaj-api there isn't
> | much to do. I will remove these from Axis2 svn and update dependencies
> | to use the Geronimo versions (once I verify they are exactly the
> | same). For jaxws-api I will scp the Axis2 version to Geronimo and
> | publish a snapshot of it. Once that's done (and assuming Axis2 is all
> | good) I will remove jaxws-api from Axis2 svn. Sounds good?
> |
> | Jarek
> |
> | On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 12:51 AM, Deepal jayasinghe <de...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> |> Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> |>> Jarek,
> |>>
> |>> So, can you please do a svn cp right now and get them going? and start
> |>> putting out SNAPSHOT's?
> |> +1
> |>
> |>
> |>
> |> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> |> To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> |> For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
> |>
> |>
> |
> | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> | To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> | For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
> |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin)
>
> iD8DBQFILJ2ogNg6eWEDv1kRAqmDAJ0QOq4mkEI/+9wIHWvKM5NRh0TERACfYq3j
> Y4HLgk11IrrvSZqX2YUds+c=
> =fAJL
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [Axis2] Merging Kernel and JWS-API
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
sounds good!
Jarek Gawor wrote:
| Ok. I'll start working on it. For jws-api and saaj-api there isn't
| much to do. I will remove these from Axis2 svn and update dependencies
| to use the Geronimo versions (once I verify they are exactly the
| same). For jaxws-api I will scp the Axis2 version to Geronimo and
| publish a snapshot of it. Once that's done (and assuming Axis2 is all
| good) I will remove jaxws-api from Axis2 svn. Sounds good?
|
| Jarek
|
| On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 12:51 AM, Deepal jayasinghe <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
|> Davanum Srinivas wrote:
|>> Jarek,
|>>
|>> So, can you please do a svn cp right now and get them going? and start
|>> putting out SNAPSHOT's?
|> +1
|>
|>
|>
|> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
|> To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
|> For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
|>
|>
|
| ---------------------------------------------------------------------
| To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
| For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin)
iD8DBQFILJ2ogNg6eWEDv1kRAqmDAJ0QOq4mkEI/+9wIHWvKM5NRh0TERACfYq3j
Y4HLgk11IrrvSZqX2YUds+c=
=fAJL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [Axis2] Merging Kernel and JWS-API
Posted by Jarek Gawor <jg...@gmail.com>.
Ok. I'll start working on it. For jws-api and saaj-api there isn't
much to do. I will remove these from Axis2 svn and update dependencies
to use the Geronimo versions (once I verify they are exactly the
same). For jaxws-api I will scp the Axis2 version to Geronimo and
publish a snapshot of it. Once that's done (and assuming Axis2 is all
good) I will remove jaxws-api from Axis2 svn. Sounds good?
Jarek
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 12:51 AM, Deepal jayasinghe <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>>
>> Jarek,
>>
>> So, can you please do a svn cp right now and get them going? and start
>> putting out SNAPSHOT's?
>
> +1
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [Axis2] Merging Kernel and JWS-API
Posted by Deepal jayasinghe <de...@gmail.com>.
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Jarek,
>
> So, can you please do a svn cp right now and get them going? and start
> putting out SNAPSHOT's?
+1
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [Axis2] Merging Kernel and JWS-API
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jarek,
So, can you please do a svn cp right now and get them going? and start putting out SNAPSHOT's?
thanks,
dims
Jarek Gawor wrote:
| Yeah, but that doesn't matter. The spec modules are separate from rest
| of the Geronimo code so we can still move the API modules but they
| wouldn't be used in the Geronimo server right away.
|
| Jarek
|
| On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:19 AM, Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
|> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|> Hash: SHA1
|>
|> Jarek,
|>
|> +1 to move the spec jars, now that they are pretty stable and have gone
|> thru the TCK's. One question there is Geronimo
|> is still on JAXWS 2.0. So that may be a block.
|>
|> - -- dims
|>
|>
|>
|> Jarek Gawor wrote:
|> | I don't see that as a good reason to move these API classes into
|> | kernel. In fact, in my opinion that makes things more confusing. I
|> | think keeping these things separate is cleaner, easier to understand,
|> | and more reusable. Another thing to understand is that these are API
|> | classes which are far more stable then rest of the Axis2 code.
|> | Therefore, they should really have their own releases separate from
|> | Axis2 releases (something we do in Geronimo). Also, like Dims said, in
|> | Java 6 these API classes are provided by the JVM, so why would you
|> | want to have these classes in the kernel jar even though they will not
|> | be used at runtime (unless you want to start creating Java-specific
|> | versions of the kernel jar).
|> |
|> | On related note, at one point I suggested moving all the Axis2 API
|> | modules (saaj-api, jws-api, jaxws-api) into Geronimo (into specs). I
|> | still think that's a good idea and maybe it would be good to
|> | reconsider. As I mentioned before, there is no good reason why these
|> | modules should be compiled everytime you build Axis2 and there is no
|> | reason to release these modules with each Axis2 release. And if we
|> | move these API modules into Geronimo specs, these modules could nicely
|> | be reused in a number of other Apache projects such as CXF, Geronimo,
|> | Harmony, etc.
|> |
|> | Jarek
|> |
|> | On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 8:07 AM, Deepal jayasinghe <de...@gmail.com>
|> wrote:
|> |> Hi all,
|> |> When I was removing annogen dependency I realized that importance of
|> |> moving JWS-API into the kernel. The reason is that those classes are
|> used
|> |> many places in Axis2, so having them in the kernel is much easier than
|> |> adding one more dependency to JWS-API.
|> |>
|> |> Thoughts ... ?
|> |>
|> |> Thank you!
|> |> Deepal
|> |> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
|> |> To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
|> |> For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
|> |>
|> |>
|> |
|> | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
|> | To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
|> | For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
|> |
|> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
|> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin)
|>
|> iD8DBQFIIGj9gNg6eWEDv1kRAo02AKCwG67AqkJh3bPI0Kp7SB+AYFd0DACfY7ic
|> 24XRfv/FUJEElvVDWR7A3T0=
|> =nIWB
|> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|>
|>
|>
|> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
|> To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
|> For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
|>
|>
|
| ---------------------------------------------------------------------
| To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
| For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin)
iD8DBQFIIGu1gNg6eWEDv1kRAh8RAJ9eTca3hm9KjIiZPqkclAtcYKd2RwCgsNKk
ZijmnBcTIwInfPpSullnVFA=
=EMvp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [Axis2] Merging Kernel and JWS-API
Posted by Jarek Gawor <jg...@gmail.com>.
Yeah, but that doesn't matter. The spec modules are separate from rest
of the Geronimo code so we can still move the API modules but they
wouldn't be used in the Geronimo server right away.
Jarek
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:19 AM, Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Jarek,
>
> +1 to move the spec jars, now that they are pretty stable and have gone
> thru the TCK's. One question there is Geronimo
> is still on JAXWS 2.0. So that may be a block.
>
> - -- dims
>
>
>
> Jarek Gawor wrote:
> | I don't see that as a good reason to move these API classes into
> | kernel. In fact, in my opinion that makes things more confusing. I
> | think keeping these things separate is cleaner, easier to understand,
> | and more reusable. Another thing to understand is that these are API
> | classes which are far more stable then rest of the Axis2 code.
> | Therefore, they should really have their own releases separate from
> | Axis2 releases (something we do in Geronimo). Also, like Dims said, in
> | Java 6 these API classes are provided by the JVM, so why would you
> | want to have these classes in the kernel jar even though they will not
> | be used at runtime (unless you want to start creating Java-specific
> | versions of the kernel jar).
> |
> | On related note, at one point I suggested moving all the Axis2 API
> | modules (saaj-api, jws-api, jaxws-api) into Geronimo (into specs). I
> | still think that's a good idea and maybe it would be good to
> | reconsider. As I mentioned before, there is no good reason why these
> | modules should be compiled everytime you build Axis2 and there is no
> | reason to release these modules with each Axis2 release. And if we
> | move these API modules into Geronimo specs, these modules could nicely
> | be reused in a number of other Apache projects such as CXF, Geronimo,
> | Harmony, etc.
> |
> | Jarek
> |
> | On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 8:07 AM, Deepal jayasinghe <de...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> |> Hi all,
> |> When I was removing annogen dependency I realized that importance of
> |> moving JWS-API into the kernel. The reason is that those classes are
> used
> |> many places in Axis2, so having them in the kernel is much easier than
> |> adding one more dependency to JWS-API.
> |>
> |> Thoughts ... ?
> |>
> |> Thank you!
> |> Deepal
> |> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> |> To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> |> For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
> |>
> |>
> |
> | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> | To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> | For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
> |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin)
>
> iD8DBQFIIGj9gNg6eWEDv1kRAo02AKCwG67AqkJh3bPI0Kp7SB+AYFd0DACfY7ic
> 24XRfv/FUJEElvVDWR7A3T0=
> =nIWB
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [Axis2] Merging Kernel and JWS-API
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jarek,
+1 to move the spec jars, now that they are pretty stable and have gone thru the TCK's. One question there is Geronimo
is still on JAXWS 2.0. So that may be a block.
- -- dims
Jarek Gawor wrote:
| I don't see that as a good reason to move these API classes into
| kernel. In fact, in my opinion that makes things more confusing. I
| think keeping these things separate is cleaner, easier to understand,
| and more reusable. Another thing to understand is that these are API
| classes which are far more stable then rest of the Axis2 code.
| Therefore, they should really have their own releases separate from
| Axis2 releases (something we do in Geronimo). Also, like Dims said, in
| Java 6 these API classes are provided by the JVM, so why would you
| want to have these classes in the kernel jar even though they will not
| be used at runtime (unless you want to start creating Java-specific
| versions of the kernel jar).
|
| On related note, at one point I suggested moving all the Axis2 API
| modules (saaj-api, jws-api, jaxws-api) into Geronimo (into specs). I
| still think that's a good idea and maybe it would be good to
| reconsider. As I mentioned before, there is no good reason why these
| modules should be compiled everytime you build Axis2 and there is no
| reason to release these modules with each Axis2 release. And if we
| move these API modules into Geronimo specs, these modules could nicely
| be reused in a number of other Apache projects such as CXF, Geronimo,
| Harmony, etc.
|
| Jarek
|
| On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 8:07 AM, Deepal jayasinghe <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
|> Hi all,
|> When I was removing annogen dependency I realized that importance of
|> moving JWS-API into the kernel. The reason is that those classes are used
|> many places in Axis2, so having them in the kernel is much easier than
|> adding one more dependency to JWS-API.
|>
|> Thoughts ... ?
|>
|> Thank you!
|> Deepal
|> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
|> To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
|> For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
|>
|>
|
| ---------------------------------------------------------------------
| To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
| For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin)
iD8DBQFIIGj9gNg6eWEDv1kRAo02AKCwG67AqkJh3bPI0Kp7SB+AYFd0DACfY7ic
24XRfv/FUJEElvVDWR7A3T0=
=nIWB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [Axis2] Merging Kernel and JWS-API
Posted by Deepal Jayasinghe <de...@opensource.lk>.
> I don't see that as a good reason to move these API classes into
> kernel. In fact, in my opinion that makes things more confusing. I
> think keeping these things separate is cleaner, easier to understand,
> and more reusable.
I agreed , but the problem is we need to have multiple jar files to get
a simple thing done. That is why I said having them in Kernel is much
easier. :-)
> Another thing to understand is that these are API
> classes which are far more stable then rest of the Axis2 code.
> Therefore, they should really have their own releases separate from
> Axis2 releases (something we do in Geronimo).
> Also, like Dims said, in
> Java 6 these API classes are provided by the JVM, so why would you
> want to have these classes in the kernel jar even though they will not
> be used at runtime (unless you want to start creating Java-specific
> versions of the kernel jar).
>
Because of the dependency ,most of use are in JDK 1.5 so we need to have
those classes if we are going to use annotations.
> On related note, at one point I suggested moving all the Axis2 API
> modules (saaj-api, jws-api, jaxws-api) into Geronimo (into specs). I
> still think that's a good idea and maybe it would be good to
> reconsider.
Yes that is a very good idea , since we have the dependency to Geronimo
specs , that make our life much easier.
> As I mentioned before, there is no good reason why these
> modules should be compiled everytime you build Axis2 and there is no
> reason to release these modules with each Axis2 release. And if we
> move these API modules into Geronimo specs, these modules could nicely
> be reused in a number of other Apache projects such as CXF, Geronimo,
> Harmony, etc.
>
Definitely .
-Deepal
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: [Axis2] Merging Kernel and JWS-API
Posted by Jarek Gawor <jg...@gmail.com>.
I don't see that as a good reason to move these API classes into
kernel. In fact, in my opinion that makes things more confusing. I
think keeping these things separate is cleaner, easier to understand,
and more reusable. Another thing to understand is that these are API
classes which are far more stable then rest of the Axis2 code.
Therefore, they should really have their own releases separate from
Axis2 releases (something we do in Geronimo). Also, like Dims said, in
Java 6 these API classes are provided by the JVM, so why would you
want to have these classes in the kernel jar even though they will not
be used at runtime (unless you want to start creating Java-specific
versions of the kernel jar).
On related note, at one point I suggested moving all the Axis2 API
modules (saaj-api, jws-api, jaxws-api) into Geronimo (into specs). I
still think that's a good idea and maybe it would be good to
reconsider. As I mentioned before, there is no good reason why these
modules should be compiled everytime you build Axis2 and there is no
reason to release these modules with each Axis2 release. And if we
move these API modules into Geronimo specs, these modules could nicely
be reused in a number of other Apache projects such as CXF, Geronimo,
Harmony, etc.
Jarek
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 8:07 AM, Deepal jayasinghe <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> When I was removing annogen dependency I realized that importance of
> moving JWS-API into the kernel. The reason is that those classes are used
> many places in Axis2, so having them in the kernel is much easier than
> adding one more dependency to JWS-API.
>
> Thoughts ... ?
>
> Thank you!
> Deepal
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org