Was there a plan for more aegis?

[Benson Margulies <bi...@basistech.com>]

I note the existence of AegisServiceFactoryBean (which implements
nothing) and AegisServiceConfiguration, which also seems to be very
slim. Are these placeholders for more capability that someone designed
once?

Re: Was there a plan for more aegis?

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

Benson Margulies wrote:
> Dan,
>
> Would you be so kind as to explain exactly what happens as a result of
> that AegisServiceConfiguration? Or did you mean that we should keep it
> so that XFire-derived configurations that use it continue to work
> without having to take out reference to it?
>   
It creates namespaces in the wsdl that do not end with a "/". 
DefaultServiceConfiguration adhere's to the JAX-WS standard where that 
does happen.
> Meanwhile, I was reading the insides of Aegis today. I note some stuff
> that isn't documented, I think ( uri='xxxxx' to control the soap
> binding?). 
>   
Yeah not everything is doc'd for sure. You may find the Aegis section of 
the XFire user's guide helpful as well: 
http://xfire.codehaus.org/User%27s+Guide

The uri="foo" stuff just allows you to use the same type mapping xml 
file for multiple services and different mappings if I recall correctly.
> Is the doc in svn?
>
>   
Nope. Just the source and the docs on the wikis.

- Dan


-- 
Dan Diephouse
MuleSource
http://mulesource.com | http://netzooid.com/blog

RE: Was there a plan for more aegis?

[Benson Margulies <bi...@basistech.com>]

Dan,

Would you be so kind as to explain exactly what happens as a result of
that AegisServiceConfiguration? Or did you mean that we should keep it
so that XFire-derived configurations that use it continue to work
without having to take out reference to it?

Meanwhile, I was reading the insides of Aegis today. I note some stuff
that isn't documented, I think ( uri='xxxxx' to control the soap
binding?). 

Is the doc in svn?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Diephouse [mailto:dan.diephouse@mulesource.com]
> Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2007 6:51 PM
> To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Was there a plan for more aegis?
> 
> Benson Margulies wrote:
> > I note the existence of AegisServiceFactoryBean (which implements
> > nothing)
> Thats cruft which I created which should be deleted.
> >  and AegisServiceConfiguration, which also seems to be very
> > slim.
> This makes provides the necessary configuration settings so that your
> service works exactly as it did in XFire. So I'd like to keep this
around
> 
> Regards,
> - Dan
> 
> --
> Dan Diephouse
> MuleSource
> http://mulesource.com | http://netzooid.com/blog

Re: Was there a plan for more aegis?

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

Benson Margulies wrote:
> I note the existence of AegisServiceFactoryBean (which implements
> nothing)
Thats cruft which I created which should be deleted.
>  and AegisServiceConfiguration, which also seems to be very
> slim. 
This makes provides the necessary configuration settings so that your 
service works exactly as it did in XFire. So I'd like to keep this around

Regards,
- Dan  

-- 
Dan Diephouse
MuleSource
http://mulesource.com | http://netzooid.com/blog