You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to c-dev@axis.apache.org by Dinesh Weerapurage <xy...@gmail.com> on 2015/07/13 19:35:41 UTC
Re: Discussion - moving forward with Axis2/C
Nadir,
Please see my comments inline.
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Nadir Amra <am...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> My goals, in no order of priority:
>
> (1) Fix bugs
> (2) Add support for pluggable XML parser. Not sure why this was not done
> from the beginning since this allows for utmost flexibility using proven
> parsers
We already have abstracted XML parser layer and have implemented both
libxml2 and Guththila parser wrappers using this layer.
thanks,
Dinesh.
Re: Discussion - moving forward with Axis2/C
Posted by Dinesh Weerapurage <xy...@gmail.com>.
I personally like CMake over ant. Question we need to ask is "Do we need to
have dependency on Java and Java libraries to build a C project?", my
answer is no. On the other hand if someone really wants to come up with an
ant build should we stop them? I don't know. In general, I didn't have any
issues with the current build system.
thanks,
Dinesh.
--
Be happy
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I will do the effort for moving to CMake.
>
> 2015-07-13 20:05 GMT+02:00 Nadir Amra <am...@us.ibm.com>:
>
>> I guess I prefer to use existing ant-based testing framework. I do not
>> know why we should spend time doing something from scratch.
>>
>> Plus is the other frameworks portable (I mean can run on IBM i from my
>> point of view). Same with build.
>>
>> I will take a look at the frameworks but I am not hopeful.
>>
>> Not sure why you are against ant? It is proven to be portable.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@gmail.com> wrote on 07/13/2015 12:55:31 PM:
>>
>> > From: Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@gmail.com>
>> > To: Apache AXIS C Developers List <c-...@axis.apache.org>
>> > Date: 07/13/2015 12:55 PM
>> > Subject: Re: Discussion - moving forward with Axis2/C
>> >
>> > Recap:
>> > Priority 1: add Google Test Framework to the code base.
>> > https://meekrosoft.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/unit-testing-c-code-
>> > with-the-googletest-framework/
>> > Or if we expirence issue with cmockery is fine. http://
>> > cmockery.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/doc/index.html
>> > 1. Implement and use lcov and gcov in the current base.
>> > 2, I am against ant, i prefer cmake and it is supported as well
>> > everywhere. Introduce CMake as build tool.
>> > 3. Fix bugs
>> > 4. Start from 1.6.0 removing features and reduce code base.
>> >
>> > The task of this week for my side is to create an excel as sprint
>> > plan, collecting all bugs present 1.6 and removal options and things
>> > might nice to introduce.
>> > Then each one of use should estimate how much time and give me a
>> deadline.
>> > We will start with priority 1 if you agree (introduce a test framework).
>> > Best Regards,
>> > Giorgio.
>> >
>> > 2015-07-13 19:35 GMT+02:00 Dinesh Weerapurage <xy...@gmail.com>:
>> > Nadir,
>>
>> > Please see my comments inline.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Nadir Amra <am...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> > My goals, in no order of priority:
>> >
>> > (1) Fix bugs
>> > (2) Add support for pluggable XML parser. Not sure why this was not
>> > done from the beginning since this allows for utmost flexibility
>> > using proven parsers
>> >
>> > We already have abstracted XML parser layer and have implemented
>> > both libxml2 and Guththila parser wrappers using this layer.
>> >
>> > thanks,
>> > Dinesh.
>> >
>>
>> >
>> > --
>> > Quiero ser el rayo de sol que cada día te despierta
>> > para hacerte respirar y vivir en me.
>> > "Favola -Moda".
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Quiero ser el rayo de sol que cada día te despierta
> para hacerte respirar y vivir en me.
> "Favola -Moda".
>
Re: Discussion - moving forward with Axis2/C
Posted by Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@gmail.com>.
I will do the effort for moving to CMake.
2015-07-13 20:05 GMT+02:00 Nadir Amra <am...@us.ibm.com>:
> I guess I prefer to use existing ant-based testing framework. I do not
> know why we should spend time doing something from scratch.
>
> Plus is the other frameworks portable (I mean can run on IBM i from my
> point of view). Same with build.
>
> I will take a look at the frameworks but I am not hopeful.
>
> Not sure why you are against ant? It is proven to be portable.
>
>
>
>
> Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@gmail.com> wrote on 07/13/2015 12:55:31 PM:
>
> > From: Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@gmail.com>
> > To: Apache AXIS C Developers List <c-...@axis.apache.org>
> > Date: 07/13/2015 12:55 PM
> > Subject: Re: Discussion - moving forward with Axis2/C
> >
> > Recap:
> > Priority 1: add Google Test Framework to the code base.
> > https://meekrosoft.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/unit-testing-c-code-
> > with-the-googletest-framework/
> > Or if we expirence issue with cmockery is fine. http://
> > cmockery.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/doc/index.html
> > 1. Implement and use lcov and gcov in the current base.
> > 2, I am against ant, i prefer cmake and it is supported as well
> > everywhere. Introduce CMake as build tool.
> > 3. Fix bugs
> > 4. Start from 1.6.0 removing features and reduce code base.
> >
> > The task of this week for my side is to create an excel as sprint
> > plan, collecting all bugs present 1.6 and removal options and things
> > might nice to introduce.
> > Then each one of use should estimate how much time and give me a
> deadline.
> > We will start with priority 1 if you agree (introduce a test framework).
> > Best Regards,
> > Giorgio.
> >
> > 2015-07-13 19:35 GMT+02:00 Dinesh Weerapurage <xy...@gmail.com>:
> > Nadir,
>
> > Please see my comments inline.
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Nadir Amra <am...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > My goals, in no order of priority:
> >
> > (1) Fix bugs
> > (2) Add support for pluggable XML parser. Not sure why this was not
> > done from the beginning since this allows for utmost flexibility
> > using proven parsers
> >
> > We already have abstracted XML parser layer and have implemented
> > both libxml2 and Guththila parser wrappers using this layer.
> >
> > thanks,
> > Dinesh.
> >
>
> >
> > --
> > Quiero ser el rayo de sol que cada día te despierta
> > para hacerte respirar y vivir en me.
> > "Favola -Moda".
>
--
Quiero ser el rayo de sol que cada día te despierta
para hacerte respirar y vivir en me.
"Favola -Moda".
Re: Discussion - moving forward with Axis2/C
Posted by Nadir Amra <am...@us.ibm.com>.
I guess I prefer to use existing ant-based testing framework. I do not
know why we should spend time doing something from scratch.
Plus is the other frameworks portable (I mean can run on IBM i from my
point of view). Same with build.
I will take a look at the frameworks but I am not hopeful.
Not sure why you are against ant? It is proven to be portable.
Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@gmail.com> wrote on 07/13/2015 12:55:31 PM:
> From: Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@gmail.com>
> To: Apache AXIS C Developers List <c-...@axis.apache.org>
> Date: 07/13/2015 12:55 PM
> Subject: Re: Discussion - moving forward with Axis2/C
>
> Recap:
> Priority 1: add Google Test Framework to the code base.
> https://meekrosoft.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/unit-testing-c-code-
> with-the-googletest-framework/
> Or if we expirence issue with cmockery is fine. http://
> cmockery.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/doc/index.html
> 1. Implement and use lcov and gcov in the current base.
> 2, I am against ant, i prefer cmake and it is supported as well
> everywhere. Introduce CMake as build tool.
> 3. Fix bugs
> 4. Start from 1.6.0 removing features and reduce code base.
>
> The task of this week for my side is to create an excel as sprint
> plan, collecting all bugs present 1.6 and removal options and things
> might nice to introduce.
> Then each one of use should estimate how much time and give me a
deadline.
> We will start with priority 1 if you agree (introduce a test framework).
> Best Regards,
> Giorgio.
>
> 2015-07-13 19:35 GMT+02:00 Dinesh Weerapurage <xy...@gmail.com>:
> Nadir,
> Please see my comments inline.
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Nadir Amra <am...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> My goals, in no order of priority:
>
> (1) Fix bugs
> (2) Add support for pluggable XML parser. Not sure why this was not
> done from the beginning since this allows for utmost flexibility
> using proven parsers
>
> We already have abstracted XML parser layer and have implemented
> both libxml2 and Guththila parser wrappers using this layer.
>
> thanks,
> Dinesh.
>
>
> --
> Quiero ser el rayo de sol que cada día te despierta
> para hacerte respirar y vivir en me.
> "Favola -Moda".
Re: Discussion - moving forward with Axis2/C
Posted by Giorgio Zoppi <gi...@gmail.com>.
Recap:
Priority 1: add Google Test Framework to the code base.
https://meekrosoft.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/unit-testing-c-code-with-the-googletest-framework/
Or if we expirence issue with cmockery is fine.
http://cmockery.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/doc/index.html
1. Implement and use lcov and gcov in the current base.
2, I am against ant, i prefer cmake and it is supported as well everywhere.
Introduce CMake as build tool.
3. Fix bugs
4. Start from 1.6.0 removing features and reduce code base.
The task of this week for my side is to create an excel as sprint plan,
collecting all bugs present 1.6 and removal options and things might nice
to introduce.
Then each one of use should estimate how much time and give me a deadline.
We will start with priority 1 if you agree (introduce a test framework).
Best Regards,
Giorgio.
2015-07-13 19:35 GMT+02:00 Dinesh Weerapurage <xy...@gmail.com>:
> Nadir,
>
> Please see my comments inline.
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Nadir Amra <am...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> My goals, in no order of priority:
>>
>> (1) Fix bugs
>> (2) Add support for pluggable XML parser. Not sure why this was not done
>> from the beginning since this allows for utmost flexibility using proven
>> parsers
>
>
> We already have abstracted XML parser layer and have implemented both
> libxml2 and Guththila parser wrappers using this layer.
>
> thanks,
> Dinesh.
>
--
Quiero ser el rayo de sol que cada día te despierta
para hacerte respirar y vivir en me.
"Favola -Moda".