You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Srinath Perera <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk> on 2003/10/29 13:39:30 UTC
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (can we have CVS)
Hi Richard;Luis,jeremy,All
I think it is better if we can have CVS (some where) as we are
writing code and need to share. I am not aware of the administrative
side of that.
Can you help us with this.
we never mind where cvs is as long as it exists; I think intially one of
you or other Geranimo commiters (Luis jeremy) can shepherd in our code
for us.
Srinath
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (can we have CVS)
Posted by Srinath Perera <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk>.
Hi Jeremy;
oh; that make the Richards work harder, Any way it sound like we are
having first phototype work at the sf.net.
we go on as dims said
> planning for the worst case scenario - i have set up a project in
>sf.net (http://sourceforge.net/projects/ews/) that can be used. Just
>create your own sf.net id and email > that to me privately. we can do
>the prototyping work there and then ......
>
Srinath
On Thu, 2003-10-30 at 09:08, Jeremy Lemaire wrote:
> Hi Srinath,
> Unfortunately we can not shepherd in your code as Luis and I are not
> commiters. We are just poor programmers who are working on the project
> on their spare time.
>
> Sorry.
>
> Jeremy.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 06:39:30PM +0600, Srinath Perera wrote:
> > Hi Richard;Luis,jeremy,All
> >
> > I think it is better if we can have CVS (some where) as we are
> > writing code and need to share. I am not aware of the administrative
> > side of that.
> >
> > Can you help us with this.
> >
> > we never mind where cvs is as long as it exists; I think intially one of
> > you or other Geranimo commiters (Luis jeremy) can shepherd in our code
> > for us.
> >
> > Srinath
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (tool framework)
Posted by Srinath Perera <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk>.
Thanks Richard;
Let us used the sf.net/contrib directory to gather proposals etc ..and
Start our discussion well prepared.
Please give me bit time respond to JAXR thread.
regards
Srinath
On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 14:21, Richard Monson-Haefel wrote:
> On 11/3/03 12:58 AM, in article 1067842729.1797.164.camel@rook, "Srinath
> Perera" <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote:
>
> > Hi All;
> >
> > As I explained in the WIKI I have laid out a framewrok for the tool.
> > It explained bit about the interface parser -> code genarator framework
> > and how Code generators can be added to Code genaretion framework.
> >
> > the explanation of the framework is at
> >
> > http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/~hemapani/JSR109/ws4j2ee/doc/purposedframework.html
> >
> > framework source code is at
> >
> > http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/~hemapani/JSR109/ws4j2ee.zip (30-40K)
> >
> > If nobody objects I thought of commit this code to the sf.net cvs
> > tommarrow in contrib(shall we have contrib dir at the sf.net to put our
> > prototype code and discuss) proj-home/contrib/framework. Then we shall
> > discuss is it ok?
> >
> > I will rewrite it if any drastic changes are needed :)
> >
> > Srinath
> >
> >
>
> Srinath,
>
> I don't have a problem with you placing code into the ews project on sf.net.
> Dims, what do you think? The ews kind of a staging ground for the ws2jee
> project right now, isn't it?
>
> To be perfectly honest I have not had a chance to review your latest
> proposal in detail. Currently I'm studying Axis to get a better handle on
> the code and how its architected and configured - the devil of any project
> is in the details. I need to have a much deeper understanding of Axis before
> I can formulate an opinion on your proposal.
>
> Richard
>
>
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (tool framework)
Posted by Richard Monson-Haefel <Ri...@Monson-Haefel.com>.
On 11/3/03 12:58 AM, in article 1067842729.1797.164.camel@rook, "Srinath
Perera" <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote:
> Hi All;
>
> As I explained in the WIKI I have laid out a framewrok for the tool.
> It explained bit about the interface parser -> code genarator framework
> and how Code generators can be added to Code genaretion framework.
>
> the explanation of the framework is at
>
> http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/~hemapani/JSR109/ws4j2ee/doc/purposedframework.html
>
> framework source code is at
>
> http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/~hemapani/JSR109/ws4j2ee.zip (30-40K)
>
> If nobody objects I thought of commit this code to the sf.net cvs
> tommarrow in contrib(shall we have contrib dir at the sf.net to put our
> prototype code and discuss) proj-home/contrib/framework. Then we shall
> discuss is it ok?
>
> I will rewrite it if any drastic changes are needed :)
>
> Srinath
>
>
Srinath,
I don't have a problem with you placing code into the ews project on sf.net.
Dims, what do you think? The ews kind of a staging ground for the ws2jee
project right now, isn't it?
To be perfectly honest I have not had a chance to review your latest
proposal in detail. Currently I'm studying Axis to get a better handle on
the code and how its architected and configured - the devil of any project
is in the details. I need to have a much deeper understanding of Axis before
I can formulate an opinion on your proposal.
Richard
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (tool framework)
Posted by Guillaume Sauthier <Gu...@Objectweb.org>.
Srinath Perera wrote:
>
> > WSDL Genration seems to work with Axis 1.1. Maybe there is still bugs
> > opens ... I will check this !
> yep I am not check after ..
>
> > >
> > > In short to use EJBProvider (IMO)it ask for fluency in the WebSerivce's
> > > as well as J2EE. how the Context of WebService map to Context of J2EE
> > > is lot of work all the time.
>
> > I don't understand this "lot of work all the time". Why ? ... Can you
> > better explain this please ?
> if it just publishing the EJB it would be ok but if you use J2EE servcie
> like security ect .. you have to map from the webservice security to
> J2EE security. Then user has to learn both and write handlers.
>
> hopefully we can give a tool that make those thing transparent to them.
OK
>
> > >
> > > Plus if we use that we are bound by the JAX-RPC mapping file limitation
> > > of axis. Actually we can enhanced EJB provider but it will bind the
> > > JSR109 impl to the Axis (IMO) too tightly.
> >
> > That's true. But if we use Axis as WebService Engine, it's mandatory to
> > use Provider for WS publication. So we should implement our own
> > EJBProvider or extends Axis one to take into account mappings.
> >
> > What is the other choice ?
>
> write a webservice that wrap the EJB. the provider is axis usual
> provider, but the webservice java class inside the Axis will find the
> EJB and invoke it plus security ect.
>
> This wrapper web service is genarated. By small changes to the generated
> web service (plug in a new module to generate different code) this
> should be able to run in other JAX-RPC runtimes as well and invoke EJB.
That seems good to me :)
Thanks for the explanations !
>
> thank for commnets
>
> Srinath
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (tool framework)
Posted by Srinath Perera <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk>.
> WSDL Genration seems to work with Axis 1.1. Maybe there is still bugs
> opens ... I will check this !
yep I am not check after ..
> >
> > In short to use EJBProvider (IMO)it ask for fluency in the WebSerivce's
> > as well as J2EE. how the Context of WebService map to Context of J2EE
> > is lot of work all the time.
> I don't understand this "lot of work all the time". Why ? ... Can you
> better explain this please ?
if it just publishing the EJB it would be ok but if you use J2EE servcie
like security ect .. you have to map from the webservice security to
J2EE security. Then user has to learn both and write handlers.
hopefully we can give a tool that make those thing transparent to them.
> >
> > Plus if we use that we are bound by the JAX-RPC mapping file limitation
> > of axis. Actually we can enhanced EJB provider but it will bind the
> > JSR109 impl to the Axis (IMO) too tightly.
>
> That's true. But if we use Axis as WebService Engine, it's mandatory to
> use Provider for WS publication. So we should implement our own
> EJBProvider or extends Axis one to take into account mappings.
>
> What is the other choice ?
write a webservice that wrap the EJB. the provider is axis usual
provider, but the webservice java class inside the Axis will find the
EJB and invoke it plus security ect.
This wrapper web service is genarated. By small changes to the generated
web service (plug in a new module to generate different code) this
should be able to run in other JAX-RPC runtimes as well and invoke EJB.
thank for commnets
Srinath
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (tool framework)
Posted by Guillaume Sauthier <Gu...@Objectweb.org>.
Srinath Perera wrote:
>
> Hi Guillaume;Richard;
>
> > > It seems to me ( I could be confused) that Axis already provides the
> > > > functionality described by your framework. It can already take a WSDL
> > > > document and generate interfaces, bindings, and implementation classes.
> > >
> > > Axis support the case for the publishing the java class, but not a EJB.
> > > If you want to publish EJB and provide other service supported by the
> > > J2EE container the user has to write lot of manual code.
> >
> > A provider for EJB exists in Axis! So you can publish an EJB Session
> > easily. But they are some leaks :
> > EJB 2.1 API SessionContext define a getMessageContext method that Axis
> > should set before delegating the method call to the EJB
> > If you want some security, transactions, ... you have to write customs
> > handlers.
>
> yes Actually before the starting JSR109 impl I did go to axis mailing
> lists with the isuue's JSR109 vs EJB provider.
> If I am remember correct if you use ejb provider there is issue of
> genarating the WSDL as well.
WSDL Genration seems to work with Axis 1.1. Maybe there is still bugs
opens ... I will check this !
>
> In short to use EJBProvider (IMO)it ask for fluency in the WebSerivce's
> as well as J2EE. how the Context of WebService map to Context of J2EE
> is lot of work all the time.
I don't understand this "lot of work all the time". Why ? ... Can you
better explain this please ?
>
> Plus if we use that we are bound by the JAX-RPC mapping file limitation
> of axis. Actually we can enhanced EJB provider but it will bind the
> JSR109 impl to the Axis (IMO) too tightly.
That's true. But if we use Axis as WebService Engine, it's mandatory to
use Provider for WS publication. So we should implement our own
EJBProvider or extends Axis one to take into account mappings.
What is the other choice ?
>
> thanks for comments
>
> Thanks
>
> Srinath
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (tool framework)
Posted by Srinath Perera <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk>.
Hi Guillaume;Richard;
> > It seems to me ( I could be confused) that Axis already provides the
> > > functionality described by your framework. It can already take a WSDL
> > > document and generate interfaces, bindings, and implementation classes.
> >
> > Axis support the case for the publishing the java class, but not a EJB.
> > If you want to publish EJB and provide other service supported by the
> > J2EE container the user has to write lot of manual code.
>
> A provider for EJB exists in Axis! So you can publish an EJB Session
> easily. But they are some leaks :
> EJB 2.1 API SessionContext define a getMessageContext method that Axis
> should set before delegating the method call to the EJB
> If you want some security, transactions, ... you have to write customs
> handlers.
yes Actually before the starting JSR109 impl I did go to axis mailing
lists with the isuue's JSR109 vs EJB provider.
If I am remember correct if you use ejb provider there is issue of
genarating the WSDL as well.
In short to use EJBProvider (IMO)it ask for fluency in the WebSerivce's
as well as J2EE. how the Context of WebService map to Context of J2EE
is lot of work all the time.
Plus if we use that we are bound by the JAX-RPC mapping file limitation
of axis. Actually we can enhanced EJB provider but it will bind the
JSR109 impl to the Axis (IMO) too tightly.
thanks for comments
Thanks
Srinath
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (tool framework)
Posted by Guillaume Sauthier <Gu...@Objectweb.org>.
Srinath Perera wrote:
>
> Hi Richard;
>
> > It seems to me ( I could be confused) that Axis already provides the
> > functionality described by your framework. It can already take a WSDL
> > document and generate interfaces, bindings, and implementation classes.
>
> Axis support the case for the publishing the java class, but not a EJB.
> If you want to publish EJB and provide other service supported by the
> J2EE container the user has to write lot of manual code.
A provider for EJB exists in Axis! So you can publish an EJB Session
easily. But they are some leaks :
EJB 2.1 API SessionContext define a getMessageContext method that Axis
should set before delegating the method call to the EJB
If you want some security, transactions, ... you have to write customs
handlers.
>
> The webservice wrapper class (your part:) ) suppose to have that code
> and take care of converting other service like security ect from
> WebService context to the J2EE contexts.
>
> > What we want to do (IMO) is generate Axis WSDDs (Web Service Deployment
> > Descriptors) from the standard J2EE 1.4 Web Service deployment descriptors -
> > specifically JAX-RPC Mapping, webservices.xml, and J2EE component
> > descriptors. I think we can do this using TrAX (Java API for XSLT).
>
> Axis support for the jaxrpc mapping file is minimum (IMO) and axis
> skelton created by WSDL2Java does not do what WebService wrapper does.
>
> plus we want to help the case create a WSDL form EJB and jaxrpc-mapping
> file.
>
> In short addition to what Axis does code genarated from our tool should
> map Context of webservice -> J2EE and save time for developers.
>
> key defferance between what axis(WSDL2Java) and ws4j2ee does is on the
> WrbServiceWrapper class.
>
> thanks for comments
>
> Thanks
>
> Srinath
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (tool framework)
Posted by Srinath Perera <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk>.
Hi Richard;
> It seems to me ( I could be confused) that Axis already provides the
> functionality described by your framework. It can already take a WSDL
> document and generate interfaces, bindings, and implementation classes.
Axis support the case for the publishing the java class, but not a EJB.
If you want to publish EJB and provide other service supported by the
J2EE container the user has to write lot of manual code.
The webservice wrapper class (your part:) ) suppose to have that code
and take care of converting other service like security ect from
WebService context to the J2EE contexts.
> What we want to do (IMO) is generate Axis WSDDs (Web Service Deployment
> Descriptors) from the standard J2EE 1.4 Web Service deployment descriptors -
> specifically JAX-RPC Mapping, webservices.xml, and J2EE component
> descriptors. I think we can do this using TrAX (Java API for XSLT).
Axis support for the jaxrpc mapping file is minimum (IMO) and axis
skelton created by WSDL2Java does not do what WebService wrapper does.
plus we want to help the case create a WSDL form EJB and jaxrpc-mapping
file.
In short addition to what Axis does code genarated from our tool should
map Context of webservice -> J2EE and save time for developers.
key defferance between what axis(WSDL2Java) and ws4j2ee does is on the
WrbServiceWrapper class.
thanks for comments
Thanks
Srinath
RE: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (tool framework)
Posted by Ias <ia...@tmax.co.kr>.
> It seems to me ( I could be confused) that Axis already
> provides the functionality described by your framework. It
> can already take a WSDL document and generate interfaces,
> bindings, and implementation classes.
>
Yes, my JAX-RPC mapper (mapping processor) is solely based on the framework:
WsdlToJ2ee from WSDL2
J2eeEmitter from Emitter
J2eeXxxWriters from JavaXxxWriters
> What we want to do (IMO) is generate Axis WSDDs (Web Service
> Deployment
> Descriptors) from the standard J2EE 1.4 Web Service
> deployment descriptors - specifically JAX-RPC Mapping,
> webservices.xml, and J2EE component descriptors. I think we
> can do this using TrAX (Java API for XSLT).
JAX-RPC mapper uses JAXB to retrieve information of a JAX-RPC mapping.
J2eeDeployWriter will emit a server-config.wsdd reflecting on the
information.
>
> Of course I'm assuming that we want to bind ws4j2ee directly
> to Axis, which is (again IMO) the best strategy for Geronimo
> - Axis is Servlet engine agnostic so this approach will work
> with just about any Geronimo configuration.
>
Currently, JAX-RPC mapper is not coupled with web.xml and webservices.xml
for J2EE 1.4 spec. In other words, since it only deals with JAX-RPC mapping,
it may need some extra information that any J2EE server can provide in an
arbitrary fashion to complete a server-config.wsdd. It could be better to
discuss this issue after prototypes for JSR-109 are available in ews.sf.net.
(I'm planning to check-in from next Wednesday or later.)
> Richard
>
>
> .
>
Thanks,
Ias
===========================================================
Lee, Changshin (Korean name)
Ias (International name)
Company Web Site: http://www.tmax.co.kr
Personal Web Site: http://www.iasandcb.pe.kr
---------------------------------------------------------
Senior Researcher, Emerging Technology Evangelist & JCP Activities
Coordinator
JCP member - http://jcp.org/en/participation/members/L
R&D Institute
Tmax Soft, Inc.
JCP member - http://jcp.org/en/participation/members/T
==========================================================
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (tool framework)
Posted by Richard Monson-Haefel <Ri...@Monson-Haefel.com>.
On 11/3/03 12:58 AM, in article 1067842729.1797.164.camel@rook, "Srinath
Perera" <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote:
> Hi All;
>
> As I explained in the WIKI I have laid out a framewrok for the tool.
> It explained bit about the interface parser -> code genarator framework
> and how Code generators can be added to Code genaretion framework.
>
Srinath,
It seems to me ( I could be confused) that Axis already provides the
functionality described by your framework. It can already take a WSDL
document and generate interfaces, bindings, and implementation classes.
What we want to do (IMO) is generate Axis WSDDs (Web Service Deployment
Descriptors) from the standard J2EE 1.4 Web Service deployment descriptors -
specifically JAX-RPC Mapping, webservices.xml, and J2EE component
descriptors. I think we can do this using TrAX (Java API for XSLT).
Of course I'm assuming that we want to bind ws4j2ee directly to Axis, which
is (again IMO) the best strategy for Geronimo - Axis is Servlet engine
agnostic so this approach will work with just about any Geronimo
configuration.
Richard
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (tool framework)
Posted by Srinath Perera <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk>.
Hi All;
As I explained in the WIKI I have laid out a framewrok for the tool.
It explained bit about the interface parser -> code genarator framework
and how Code generators can be added to Code genaretion framework.
the explanation of the framework is at
http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/~hemapani/JSR109/ws4j2ee/doc/purposedframework.html
framework source code is at
http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/~hemapani/JSR109/ws4j2ee.zip (30-40K)
If nobody objects I thought of commit this code to the sf.net cvs
tommarrow in contrib(shall we have contrib dir at the sf.net to put our
prototype code and discuss) proj-home/contrib/framework. Then we shall
discuss is it ok?
I will rewrite it if any drastic changes are needed :)
Srinath
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (can we have CVS)
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <di...@yahoo.com>.
Jeremy,
Send me your sf.net id and i will add it ASAP (http://sf.net/projects/ews/) We can have all
discussions on this mailing list, use the wiki etc everything except CVS. we'll use the sf project
for the CVS ONLY.
Thanks,
-- dims
--- Jeremy Lemaire <Je...@online.fr> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Srinath,
> Unfortunately we can not shepherd in your code as Luis and I are not
> commiters. We are just poor programmers who are working on the project
> on their spare time.
>
> Sorry.
>
> Jeremy.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 06:39:30PM +0600, Srinath Perera wrote:
> > Hi Richard;Luis,jeremy,All
> >
> > I think it is better if we can have CVS (some where) as we are
> > writing code and need to share. I am not aware of the administrative
> > side of that.
> >
> > Can you help us with this.
> >
> > we never mind where cvs is as long as it exists; I think intially one of
> > you or other Geranimo commiters (Luis jeremy) can shepherd in our code
> > for us.
> >
> > Srinath
> >
> >
> >
=====
Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (can we have CVS)
Posted by Jeremy Lemaire <Je...@online.fr>.
Hi Srinath,
Unfortunately we can not shepherd in your code as Luis and I are not
commiters. We are just poor programmers who are working on the project
on their spare time.
Sorry.
Jeremy.
On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 06:39:30PM +0600, Srinath Perera wrote:
> Hi Richard;Luis,jeremy,All
>
> I think it is better if we can have CVS (some where) as we are
> writing code and need to share. I am not aware of the administrative
> side of that.
>
> Can you help us with this.
>
> we never mind where cvs is as long as it exists; I think intially one of
> you or other Geranimo commiters (Luis jeremy) can shepherd in our code
> for us.
>
> Srinath
>
>
>
Re: CVS sandboxing (was: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (can we have CVS))
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <di...@yahoo.com>.
Thanks Leo. As i stated in my other email. Let's use sf.net JUST for the code and share all other
resources like wiki etc with the regular geronimo project.
Thanks,
dims
--- Leo Simons <le...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi gang!
>
> in general, all code that is put on ASF servers must be put there by an
> ASF committer who has signed the Contributor's License Agreement. Legal
> oversight 'n all. So while it sure is possible to create a sandbox cvs,
> its still not possible to provide non-committers with access to that
> sandbox.
>
> Hence, sourceforge (or some other CVS server) is your best bet.
>
> regards!
>
> - Leo Simons
>
> Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> > +1 to not affecting the geronimo main codebase right now, but
> > a contrib/ or sandbox/ kinda place would be useful for this type
> > of experimentation. That way people can develop stuff there and
> > then merge in. sf.net is always an option, but that seems
> > "too disconnected" to me.
>
>
=====
Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
CVS sandboxing (was: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (can we have
CVS))
Posted by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>.
Hi gang!
in general, all code that is put on ASF servers must be put there by an
ASF committer who has signed the Contributor's License Agreement. Legal
oversight 'n all. So while it sure is possible to create a sandbox cvs,
its still not possible to provide non-committers with access to that
sandbox.
Hence, sourceforge (or some other CVS server) is your best bet.
regards!
- Leo Simons
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> +1 to not affecting the geronimo main codebase right now, but
> a contrib/ or sandbox/ kinda place would be useful for this type
> of experimentation. That way people can develop stuff there and
> then merge in. sf.net is always an option, but that seems
> "too disconnected" to me.
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (can we have CVS)
Posted by Srinath Perera <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk>.
Hi All;
> > Another concern I have is that you are ready to sumbit code when I'm
> > entirely sure we have brainstormed enough on the subject. I don't want
> > to a stick in the mud, but I think we need to consider the design and do some
> > prototyping before we start to commit changes to the code base.
I am accept your point completely. I have no idea of putting final codes
in (codes are not final even after the realese:) ).
My concern is to have code as help to explain what we are talking about.
Until the brainstrom and design done the codes written are prototypes
and there should not be any claims to make them final.
to start the brain stroming let me revised the Architecture in the WIKI
and list concern /TODO again shall we start on top of it. everybody can
attached **detailed** plan for own work (may be backup with the code).
We shall discuss.
>Of course, putting stuff in contrib/ requires commit privs too.
> If one of you guys is a geronimo committer than a contrib/ dir
> where people submit patches would work, but definitely a pain
> for the committer. Maybe sf.net is the easier path forward.
yes sf.net is ok with me. (do not need to give Richrad a hard time)
Srinath
On Thu, 2003-10-30 at 03:43, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> +1 to not affecting the geronimo main codebase right now, but
> a contrib/ or sandbox/ kinda place would be useful for this type
> of experimentation. That way people can develop stuff there and
> then merge in. sf.net is always an option, but that seems
> "too disconnected" to me.
>
> Of course, putting stuff in contrib/ requires commit privs too.
> If one of you guys is a geronimo committer than a contrib/ dir
> where people submit patches would work, but definitely a pain
> for the committer. Maybe sf.net is the easier path forward.
>
> Sanjiva.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Davanum Srinivas" <di...@yahoo.com>
> To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>; <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk>
> Cc: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sa...@watson.ibm.com>; "Ias"
> <ia...@tmax.co.kr>; "Luis Avila" <la...@axer.cl>; "Jeremy Lemaire"
> <Je...@online.fr>
> Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 3:25 AM
> Subject: Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (can we have CVS)
>
>
> > planning for the worst case scenario - i have set up a project in sf.net
> > (http://sourceforge.net/projects/ews/) that can be used. Just create your
> own sf.net id and email
> > that to me privately. we can do the prototyping work there and then ......
> >
> > Thanks,
> > dims
> >
> > --- Richard Monson-Haefel <Ri...@Monson-Haefel.com> wrote:
> > > Glad to help, but I have a couple of concerns. First, you have to be
> voted
> > > in as a committer which requires some kind of process that I'm not
> entirely
> > > sure was every established. Unless your a project founder you kind of
> have
> > > to prove yourself first and then you'll get CVS privileges.
> > >
> > > Another concern I have is that you are ready to sumbit code when I'm
> > > entirely sure we have brainstormed enough on the subject. I don't want
> to a
> > > stick in the mud, but I think we need to consider the design and do some
> > > prototyping before we start to commit changes to the code base.
> > >
> > > Is there some procedure for setting up a dumping ground for prototype
> code,
> > > so that Ias, Sanjiva, and myself can check stuff in without worring
> about
> > > impacting the Geronimo code base - kind of a dumping ground for
> discussion
> > > only.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10/29/03 6:39 AM, "Srinath Perera" <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Richard;Luis,jeremy,All
> > > >
> > > > I think it is better if we can have CVS (some where) as we are
> > > > writing code and need to share. I am not aware of the administrative
> > > > side of that.
> > > >
> > > > Can you help us with this.
> > > >
> > > > we never mind where cvs is as long as it exists; I think intially one
> of
> > > > you or other Geranimo commiters (Luis jeremy) can shepherd in our code
> > > > for us.
> > > >
> > > > Srinath
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Richard Monson-Haefel
> > > Co-Founder\Developer, Apache Geronimo
> > > Author of:
> > > J2EE Web Services (AW 2003)
> > > Enterprise JavaBeans, 4ed (O'Reilly 2004)
> > > Java Message Service (O'Reilly 2000)
> > > http://www.Monson-Haefel.com
> > >
> >
> >
> > =====
> > Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
>
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (can we have CVS)
Posted by Sanjiva Weerawarana <sa...@watson.ibm.com>.
+1 to not affecting the geronimo main codebase right now, but
a contrib/ or sandbox/ kinda place would be useful for this type
of experimentation. That way people can develop stuff there and
then merge in. sf.net is always an option, but that seems
"too disconnected" to me.
Of course, putting stuff in contrib/ requires commit privs too.
If one of you guys is a geronimo committer than a contrib/ dir
where people submit patches would work, but definitely a pain
for the committer. Maybe sf.net is the easier path forward.
Sanjiva.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Davanum Srinivas" <di...@yahoo.com>
To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>; <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk>
Cc: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sa...@watson.ibm.com>; "Ias"
<ia...@tmax.co.kr>; "Luis Avila" <la...@axer.cl>; "Jeremy Lemaire"
<Je...@online.fr>
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 3:25 AM
Subject: Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (can we have CVS)
> planning for the worst case scenario - i have set up a project in sf.net
> (http://sourceforge.net/projects/ews/) that can be used. Just create your
own sf.net id and email
> that to me privately. we can do the prototyping work there and then ......
>
> Thanks,
> dims
>
> --- Richard Monson-Haefel <Ri...@Monson-Haefel.com> wrote:
> > Glad to help, but I have a couple of concerns. First, you have to be
voted
> > in as a committer which requires some kind of process that I'm not
entirely
> > sure was every established. Unless your a project founder you kind of
have
> > to prove yourself first and then you'll get CVS privileges.
> >
> > Another concern I have is that you are ready to sumbit code when I'm
> > entirely sure we have brainstormed enough on the subject. I don't want
to a
> > stick in the mud, but I think we need to consider the design and do some
> > prototyping before we start to commit changes to the code base.
> >
> > Is there some procedure for setting up a dumping ground for prototype
code,
> > so that Ias, Sanjiva, and myself can check stuff in without worring
about
> > impacting the Geronimo code base - kind of a dumping ground for
discussion
> > only.
> >
> >
> > On 10/29/03 6:39 AM, "Srinath Perera" <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Richard;Luis,jeremy,All
> > >
> > > I think it is better if we can have CVS (some where) as we are
> > > writing code and need to share. I am not aware of the administrative
> > > side of that.
> > >
> > > Can you help us with this.
> > >
> > > we never mind where cvs is as long as it exists; I think intially one
of
> > > you or other Geranimo commiters (Luis jeremy) can shepherd in our code
> > > for us.
> > >
> > > Srinath
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Richard Monson-Haefel
> > Co-Founder\Developer, Apache Geronimo
> > Author of:
> > J2EE Web Services (AW 2003)
> > Enterprise JavaBeans, 4ed (O'Reilly 2004)
> > Java Message Service (O'Reilly 2000)
> > http://www.Monson-Haefel.com
> >
>
>
> =====
> Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (can we have CVS)
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <di...@yahoo.com>.
planning for the worst case scenario - i have set up a project in sf.net
(http://sourceforge.net/projects/ews/) that can be used. Just create your own sf.net id and email
that to me privately. we can do the prototyping work there and then ......
Thanks,
dims
--- Richard Monson-Haefel <Ri...@Monson-Haefel.com> wrote:
> Glad to help, but I have a couple of concerns. First, you have to be voted
> in as a committer which requires some kind of process that I'm not entirely
> sure was every established. Unless your a project founder you kind of have
> to prove yourself first and then you'll get CVS privileges.
>
> Another concern I have is that you are ready to sumbit code when I'm
> entirely sure we have brainstormed enough on the subject. I don't want to a
> stick in the mud, but I think we need to consider the design and do some
> prototyping before we start to commit changes to the code base.
>
> Is there some procedure for setting up a dumping ground for prototype code,
> so that Ias, Sanjiva, and myself can check stuff in without worring about
> impacting the Geronimo code base - kind of a dumping ground for discussion
> only.
>
>
> On 10/29/03 6:39 AM, "Srinath Perera" <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Richard;Luis,jeremy,All
> >
> > I think it is better if we can have CVS (some where) as we are
> > writing code and need to share. I am not aware of the administrative
> > side of that.
> >
> > Can you help us with this.
> >
> > we never mind where cvs is as long as it exists; I think intially one of
> > you or other Geranimo commiters (Luis jeremy) can shepherd in our code
> > for us.
> >
> > Srinath
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Richard Monson-Haefel
> Co-Founder\Developer, Apache Geronimo
> Author of:
> J2EE Web Services (AW 2003)
> Enterprise JavaBeans, 4ed (O'Reilly 2004)
> Java Message Service (O'Reilly 2000)
> http://www.Monson-Haefel.com
>
=====
Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
Re: JSR 109 implementation for Apache (can we have CVS)
Posted by Richard Monson-Haefel <Ri...@Monson-Haefel.com>.
Glad to help, but I have a couple of concerns. First, you have to be voted
in as a committer which requires some kind of process that I'm not entirely
sure was every established. Unless your a project founder you kind of have
to prove yourself first and then you'll get CVS privileges.
Another concern I have is that you are ready to sumbit code when I'm
entirely sure we have brainstormed enough on the subject. I don't want to a
stick in the mud, but I think we need to consider the design and do some
prototyping before we start to commit changes to the code base.
Is there some procedure for setting up a dumping ground for prototype code,
so that Ias, Sanjiva, and myself can check stuff in without worring about
impacting the Geronimo code base - kind of a dumping ground for discussion
only.
On 10/29/03 6:39 AM, "Srinath Perera" <he...@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk>
wrote:
> Hi Richard;Luis,jeremy,All
>
> I think it is better if we can have CVS (some where) as we are
> writing code and need to share. I am not aware of the administrative
> side of that.
>
> Can you help us with this.
>
> we never mind where cvs is as long as it exists; I think intially one of
> you or other Geranimo commiters (Luis jeremy) can shepherd in our code
> for us.
>
> Srinath
>
>
>
--
Richard Monson-Haefel
Co-Founder\Developer, Apache Geronimo
Author of:
J2EE Web Services (AW 2003)
Enterprise JavaBeans, 4ed (O'Reilly 2004)
Java Message Service (O'Reilly 2000)
http://www.Monson-Haefel.com