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 Samisa Abeysinghe <sa...@yahoo.com> on 2004/11/15 06:00:36 UTC
Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Hi All,
I have done some major improvements to axis2 transport over the past couple of weeks (e.g.
cookie support and keep alive support etc.)
I did not update the LibWWW transport in line with those changes.
I feel that it is a burden to keep updating LibWWW based transport as well (unless someone
voulenteers to do so)
Hence I have assumed we are only using axis2 transport from 1.4 onwards. Is that fair enough?
Thanks,
Samisa...
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com
Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Posted by Roshan Weerasuriya <ro...@opensource.lk>.
+1.
But if any one needs it then some one could voulenteer to do it.
Roshan
On Mon, 2004-11-15 at 16:00, John Hawkins wrote:
>
>
> +1
>
>
> John Hawkins
>
>
>
>
>
> Samisa Abeysinghe
> <samisa_abeysingh
> e@yahoo.com> To
> axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org
> 15/11/2004 05:00 cc
>
> Subject
> Please respond to Do we need to keep LibWWW transport
> "Apache AXIS C updated
> Developers List"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi All,
> I have done some major improvements to axis2 transport over the past
> couple of weeks (e.g.
> cookie support and keep alive support etc.)
>
> I did not update the LibWWW transport in line with those changes.
> I feel that it is a burden to keep updating LibWWW based transport as
> well (unless someone
> voulenteers to do so)
>
> Hence I have assumed we are only using axis2 transport from 1.4
> onwards. Is that fair enough?
> Thanks,
> Samisa...
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
> www.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Posted by Damitha Kumarage <da...@opensource.lk>.
Hi,
+1 for keeping informatin about modules documented somewherer. But
ws-axis/c is not a place for such documents. It is already cluttered with
lot of things. I suggest to put this in the doc folder
tbanks
damitha
> After thinking about this for some time, I also think I have to agree with
> damitha. If someone does decide to maintain an unmaintained module it
> would
> require some effort to get things going again. This could casue hindrance
> to
> a volunteer willing to take up maintainance of a certain module that was
> removed thereby discouraging them. Now I think the even the removal from
> build systems should be done in such a way so that they can be re-added
> easily later. e.g. Simply reomve a project from the vc workspace and let
> the
> relevant project files stay where they are. If needed to reawaken the
> project simple add it back to the workspace. For make and ant...?
>
> So I suggest to keep a file say modules.txt at ws-axis/c.
>
> Here is something to start with. please correct any item as necessary
>
> Module Role
> Status
>
> Apache 1.3.X module Server Transport plugin maintained
> Apache 2.X module Server Transport plugin
> maintained
> Axis2Transport Core Component
> maintained
> AxisClient Core Component
> maintained
> AxisServer Core Component
> maintained
> AxisTransport Client Transport plugin
> removed
> AxisTransportLibwww Client Transport plugin
> unmaintained
> AxisXMLParserExpat XML Paser plugin
> unmaintained
> AxisXMLParserTspp XML Paser plugin
> unmaintained
> AxisXMLParserXerces XML Paser plugin maintained
> SimpleAxisServer Server Transport
> maintained
>
> sanjaya.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Damitha Kumarage" <da...@opensource.lk>
> To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 6:46 PM
> Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
>
>
>> Hi,
>> I think we should only remove all refrences of unmaintained modules from
>> all kind of build process(make ,ant, vc). But I prefer keeping the
>> source at cvs for the time being. That might help for interested
>> parties.
>>
>> regards
>> damitha
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > +1 for documenting status of modules - where would we do this, though
>> a
>> > cvs
>> > readme or on the website?
>> > Is there any way that we can remove libwww entirely from the src
>> > tree
>> > - does cvs allow you to find "deleted files" as some repositories do
>> (I
>> > don't know enough about how cvs works, sorry).
>> >
>> > +1 for build frameworks being updated so they now longer reference
> libwww
>> > at all.
>> >
>> > John Hawkins
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "sanjaya
>> > singharage"
>> > <sanjayas@opensou
> To
>> > rce.lk> "Apache AXIS C Developers List"
>> > <ax...@ws.apache.org>
>> > 17/11/2004 04:10
> cc
>> >
>> >
> Subject
>> > Please respond to Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW
>> > "Apache AXIS C transport updated
>> > Developers List"
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > A question on infrastructure. The current active developers will know
> what
>> > are being maintained and what are not. But for new people or for the
> sake
>> > of
>> > documenting it should we put it down somewhere as to the current
>> status
> of
>> > each module (i.e. whether they are being maintained or not) or is this
>> > overkill?
>> > Also what should be done for build frameworks (i.e. vc, ant, make) for
>> > unmaintained modules? For example should we remove the libwww
>> transport
>> > project from the Distribution workspace (while keeping the vc projects
> if
>> > needed later)?
>> >
>> >
>> > +1 for hibernating libwww transport.
>> >
>> > sanjaya.
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "John Hawkins" <HA...@uk.ibm.com>
>> > To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
>> > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 4:00 PM
>> > Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> +1
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> John Hawkins
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Samisa Abeysinghe
>> >> <samisa_abeysingh
>> >> e@yahoo.com>
>> > To
>> >> axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org
>> >> 15/11/2004 05:00
>> > cc
>> >>
>> >>
>> > Subject
>> >> Please respond to Do we need to keep LibWWW
>> > transport
>> >> "Apache AXIS C updated
>> >> Developers List"
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Hi All,
>> >> I have done some major improvements to axis2 transport over the
> past
>> >> couple of weeks (e.g.
>> >> cookie support and keep alive support etc.)
>> >>
>> >> I did not update the LibWWW transport in line with those changes.
>> >> I feel that it is a burden to keep updating LibWWW based
>> transport
>> >> as
>> >> well (unless someone
>> >> voulenteers to do so)
>> >>
>> >> Hence I have assumed we are only using axis2 transport from 1.4
>> >> onwards. Is that fair enough?
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Samisa...
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> __________________________________
>> >> Do you Yahoo!?
>> >> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
>> >> www.yahoo.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Damitha Kumarage
>> hSenid Software International (PVT) Ltd
>>
>
>
>
>
--
Damitha Kumarage
hSenid Software International (PVT) Ltd
Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Posted by John Hawkins <HA...@uk.ibm.com>.
+1 for complete removal.
Old code is wat repository histories are there for!
If someone wants to bring back the code then the chances are they'll have
to do work to get it going again anyway because of code changes.
Samisa brings out the biggest issue for me which is the code trail that
gets left behind e.g. SSL options in WSDL2Ws. As this product grows and
grows we need to ensure we keep it as clean as possible. Old code only adds
complexity and does no one any favours.
John Hawkins
Samisa Abeysinghe
<samisa_abeysingh
e@yahoo.com> To
Apache AXIS C Developers List
22/11/2004 10:52 <ax...@ws.apache.org>
cc
Please respond to Subject
"Apache AXIS C Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW
Developers List" transport updated
> If there are bugs accumulating on an unsupported module, that means that
> somebody finding bugs on it, and means somebody trying to use it. So he
> can volunteer to fix these bugs.
That also means that someone is using a buggy component and we may have to
instruct them (often
repeatedly) that there is a bug in that so use the other. So it is *extra*
burden.
It would be so nice if those who find bugs fix those themselves. But how
real is that? Often
problems are rerported, but not solutions.
The danger of keeping the deprecated stuff is that after some time, we will
have smelly code. Like
the one happened to old SSL implementation. Not only it had to be removed,
but also there are some
parts of the code where the scars are still left - e.g. WSDL tool, secure
param in Call class
methods etc. So now we have to clean them all - this is a maintanance
headache.
Yet another example. SimpleAxisServer was outdated with new transport
abstraction layer. When I
was fixing it, the old code wasted more than two days of mine - as it was
so outdated. I finally
wrote all from scratch.
So my experiance is, more often than not, outdated stuff waste time.
Samisa...
--- Damitha Kumarage <da...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> Hi Samisa,
> I think you did not get what I suggested earlier.
> What we are using by default is xercesc parser axis2 transport etc. that
> is fine. But what I suggest is that we keep the modules in the cvs as
> source. But remove them from the build files. For example we dont' build
> expat by default. We don't build libwww by default in the make build. But
> I don't agree removing them from cvs source as well.
>
> And we keep a document in the docs folder called modules.html(for
example)
> and there keep a record of supported and unsuppored modules(as sanjaya
> suggested) In our distributions we don't give expat or libwww(or any
> unspported module) until somebody actively involve working on a currently
> unsupported module.
>
> If there are bugs accumulating on an unsupported module, that means that
> somebody finding bugs on it, and means somebody trying to use it. So he
> can volunteer to fix these bugs. Accumulating bugs on an unsupported
> module and not fixing it immediately is not a problem. Our aim is not to
> keep jira clean of bug reports(I guess). Our aim of keeping Jira is as a
> good informationa source(I guess)
>
> thanks
> damitha
>
>
> > Considering that Xerces is less buggy and stable, and that Xerces is
from
> > Apache and Expat is not,
> > I preffer Xerces.
> > Additionally, now that we are going to have a TSPP, we are less likely
to
> > use Expat.
> >
> > So I am for the removal of Expat based lib, provided that there are
couple
> > of bugs in Expat based
> > lib that were not being attended by any one for some time. Either
should
> > fix them or get rid of
> > Expat based lib if we do not have people willing to maintain that lib.
> >
> > (we should minimize bugs hanging in Jira without being fixed and if the
> > bugs are related to less
> > used components for which we have better alternatives, always better to
> > get rid of them - else
> > time and effort spent on those are wasted.)
> >
> > Samisa...
> >
> > --- sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> >
> >> Yes I noticed. If we choose to let that be, what shall be done with
> >> XMLParserExpat?
> >>
> >> sanjaya.
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Samisa Abeysinghe" <sa...@yahoo.com>
> >> To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> >> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 12:42 PM
> >> Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
> >>
> >>
> >> > Thoughts on LibWWW transport came too late I guess. I have already
> >> removed
> >> it last week :(
> >> > Samisa...
> >> >
> >> > --- sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > After thinking about this for some time, I also think I have to
> >> agree
> >> with
> >> > > damitha. If someone does decide to maintain an unmaintained module
> >> it
> >> would
> >> > > require some effort to get things going again. This could casue
> >> hindrance to
> >> > > a volunteer willing to take up maintainance of a certain module
that
> >> was
> >> > > removed thereby discouraging them. Now I think the even the
removal
> >> from
> >> > > build systems should be done in such a way so that they can be
> >> re-added
> >> > > easily later. e.g. Simply reomve a project from the vc workspace
and
> >> let
> >> the
> >> > > relevant project files stay where they are. If needed to reawaken
> >> the
> >> > > project simple add it back to the workspace. For make and ant...?
> >> > >
> >> > > So I suggest to keep a file say modules.txt at ws-axis/c.
> >> > >
> >> > > Here is something to start with. please correct any item as
> >> necessary
> >> > >
> >> > > Module Role
> >> > > Status
> >> > >
> >> > > Apache 1.3.X module Server Transport plugin
> >> maintained
> >> > > Apache 2.X module Server Transport plugin
> >> maintained
> >> > > Axis2Transport Core Component
> >> > > maintained
> >> > > AxisClient Core Component
> >> > > maintained
> >> > > AxisServer Core Component
> >> > > maintained
> >> > > AxisTransport Client Transport plugin
> >> > > removed
> >> > > AxisTransportLibwww Client Transport plugin
> >> > > unmaintained
> >> > > AxisXMLParserExpat XML Paser plugin
> >> unmaintained
> >> > > AxisXMLParserTspp XML Paser plugin
> >> unmaintained
> >> > > AxisXMLParserXerces XML Paser plugin
> >> maintained
> >> > > SimpleAxisServer Server Transport
> >> > > maintained
> >> > >
> >> > > sanjaya.
> >> > >
> >> > > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > > From: "Damitha Kumarage" <da...@opensource.lk>
> >> > > To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> >> > > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 6:46 PM
> >> > > Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > > Hi,
> >> > > > I think we should only remove all refrences of unmaintained
> >> modules
> >> from
> >> > > > all kind of build process(make ,ant, vc). But I prefer keeping
> >> the
> >> > > > source at cvs for the time being. That might help for interested
> >> parties.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > regards
> >> > > > damitha
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > +1 for documenting status of modules - where would we do this,
> >> though a
> >> > > > > cvs
> >> > > > > readme or on the website?
> >> > > > > Is there any way that we can remove libwww entirely from
> >> the
> >> src
> >> > > > > tree
> >> > > > > - does cvs allow you to find "deleted files" as some
> >> repositories do
> >> (I
> >> > > > > don't know enough about how cvs works, sorry).
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > +1 for build frameworks being updated so they now longer
> >> reference
> >> > > libwww
> >> > > > > at all.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > John Hawkins
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > "sanjaya
> >> > > > > singharage"
> >> > > > > <sanjayas@opensou
> >> > > To
> >> > > > > rce.lk> "Apache AXIS C
Developers
> >> List"
> >> > > > >
<ax...@ws.apache.org>
> >> > > > > 17/11/2004 04:10
> >> > > cc
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > Subject
> >> > > > > Please respond to Re: Do we need to keep
> >> LibWWW
> >> > > > > "Apache AXIS C transport updated
> >> > > > > Developers List"
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > A question on infrastructure. The current active developers
will
> >> know
> >> > > what
> >> > > > > are being maintained and what are not. But for new people or
for
> >> the
> >> > > sake
> >> > > > > of
> >> > > > > documenting it should we put it down somewhere as to the
current
> >> status
> >> > > of
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com
Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Posted by Samisa Abeysinghe <sa...@yahoo.com>.
> If there are bugs accumulating on an unsupported module, that means that
> somebody finding bugs on it, and means somebody trying to use it. So he
> can volunteer to fix these bugs.
That also means that someone is using a buggy component and we may have to instruct them (often
repeatedly) that there is a bug in that so use the other. So it is *extra* burden.
It would be so nice if those who find bugs fix those themselves. But how real is that? Often
problems are rerported, but not solutions.
The danger of keeping the deprecated stuff is that after some time, we will have smelly code. Like
the one happened to old SSL implementation. Not only it had to be removed, but also there are some
parts of the code where the scars are still left - e.g. WSDL tool, secure param in Call class
methods etc. So now we have to clean them all - this is a maintanance headache.
Yet another example. SimpleAxisServer was outdated with new transport abstraction layer. When I
was fixing it, the old code wasted more than two days of mine - as it was so outdated. I finally
wrote all from scratch.
So my experiance is, more often than not, outdated stuff waste time.
Samisa...
--- Damitha Kumarage <da...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> Hi Samisa,
> I think you did not get what I suggested earlier.
> What we are using by default is xercesc parser axis2 transport etc. that
> is fine. But what I suggest is that we keep the modules in the cvs as
> source. But remove them from the build files. For example we dont' build
> expat by default. We don't build libwww by default in the make build. But
> I don't agree removing them from cvs source as well.
>
> And we keep a document in the docs folder called modules.html(for example)
> and there keep a record of supported and unsuppored modules(as sanjaya
> suggested) In our distributions we don't give expat or libwww(or any
> unspported module) until somebody actively involve working on a currently
> unsupported module.
>
> If there are bugs accumulating on an unsupported module, that means that
> somebody finding bugs on it, and means somebody trying to use it. So he
> can volunteer to fix these bugs. Accumulating bugs on an unsupported
> module and not fixing it immediately is not a problem. Our aim is not to
> keep jira clean of bug reports(I guess). Our aim of keeping Jira is as a
> good informationa source(I guess)
>
> thanks
> damitha
>
>
> > Considering that Xerces is less buggy and stable, and that Xerces is from
> > Apache and Expat is not,
> > I preffer Xerces.
> > Additionally, now that we are going to have a TSPP, we are less likely to
> > use Expat.
> >
> > So I am for the removal of Expat based lib, provided that there are couple
> > of bugs in Expat based
> > lib that were not being attended by any one for some time. Either should
> > fix them or get rid of
> > Expat based lib if we do not have people willing to maintain that lib.
> >
> > (we should minimize bugs hanging in Jira without being fixed and if the
> > bugs are related to less
> > used components for which we have better alternatives, always better to
> > get rid of them - else
> > time and effort spent on those are wasted.)
> >
> > Samisa...
> >
> > --- sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> >
> >> Yes I noticed. If we choose to let that be, what shall be done with
> >> XMLParserExpat?
> >>
> >> sanjaya.
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Samisa Abeysinghe" <sa...@yahoo.com>
> >> To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> >> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 12:42 PM
> >> Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
> >>
> >>
> >> > Thoughts on LibWWW transport came too late I guess. I have already
> >> removed
> >> it last week :(
> >> > Samisa...
> >> >
> >> > --- sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > After thinking about this for some time, I also think I have to
> >> agree
> >> with
> >> > > damitha. If someone does decide to maintain an unmaintained module
> >> it
> >> would
> >> > > require some effort to get things going again. This could casue
> >> hindrance to
> >> > > a volunteer willing to take up maintainance of a certain module that
> >> was
> >> > > removed thereby discouraging them. Now I think the even the removal
> >> from
> >> > > build systems should be done in such a way so that they can be
> >> re-added
> >> > > easily later. e.g. Simply reomve a project from the vc workspace and
> >> let
> >> the
> >> > > relevant project files stay where they are. If needed to reawaken
> >> the
> >> > > project simple add it back to the workspace. For make and ant...?
> >> > >
> >> > > So I suggest to keep a file say modules.txt at ws-axis/c.
> >> > >
> >> > > Here is something to start with. please correct any item as
> >> necessary
> >> > >
> >> > > Module Role
> >> > > Status
> >> > >
> >> > > Apache 1.3.X module Server Transport plugin
> >> maintained
> >> > > Apache 2.X module Server Transport plugin
> >> maintained
> >> > > Axis2Transport Core Component
> >> > > maintained
> >> > > AxisClient Core Component
> >> > > maintained
> >> > > AxisServer Core Component
> >> > > maintained
> >> > > AxisTransport Client Transport plugin
> >> > > removed
> >> > > AxisTransportLibwww Client Transport plugin
> >> > > unmaintained
> >> > > AxisXMLParserExpat XML Paser plugin
> >> unmaintained
> >> > > AxisXMLParserTspp XML Paser plugin
> >> unmaintained
> >> > > AxisXMLParserXerces XML Paser plugin
> >> maintained
> >> > > SimpleAxisServer Server Transport
> >> > > maintained
> >> > >
> >> > > sanjaya.
> >> > >
> >> > > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > > From: "Damitha Kumarage" <da...@opensource.lk>
> >> > > To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> >> > > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 6:46 PM
> >> > > Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > > Hi,
> >> > > > I think we should only remove all refrences of unmaintained
> >> modules
> >> from
> >> > > > all kind of build process(make ,ant, vc). But I prefer keeping
> >> the
> >> > > > source at cvs for the time being. That might help for interested
> >> parties.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > regards
> >> > > > damitha
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > +1 for documenting status of modules - where would we do this,
> >> though a
> >> > > > > cvs
> >> > > > > readme or on the website?
> >> > > > > Is there any way that we can remove libwww entirely from
> >> the
> >> src
> >> > > > > tree
> >> > > > > - does cvs allow you to find "deleted files" as some
> >> repositories do
> >> (I
> >> > > > > don't know enough about how cvs works, sorry).
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > +1 for build frameworks being updated so they now longer
> >> reference
> >> > > libwww
> >> > > > > at all.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > John Hawkins
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > "sanjaya
> >> > > > > singharage"
> >> > > > > <sanjayas@opensou
> >> > > To
> >> > > > > rce.lk> "Apache AXIS C Developers
> >> List"
> >> > > > > <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> >> > > > > 17/11/2004 04:10
> >> > > cc
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > Subject
> >> > > > > Please respond to Re: Do we need to keep
> >> LibWWW
> >> > > > > "Apache AXIS C transport updated
> >> > > > > Developers List"
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > A question on infrastructure. The current active developers will
> >> know
> >> > > what
> >> > > > > are being maintained and what are not. But for new people or for
> >> the
> >> > > sake
> >> > > > > of
> >> > > > > documenting it should we put it down somewhere as to the current
> >> status
> >> > > of
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com
Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Posted by Damitha Kumarage <da...@opensource.lk>.
Hi Samisa,
I think you did not get what I suggested earlier.
What we are using by default is xercesc parser axis2 transport etc. that
is fine. But what I suggest is that we keep the modules in the cvs as
source. But remove them from the build files. For example we dont' build
expat by default. We don't build libwww by default in the make build. But
I don't agree removing them from cvs source as well.
And we keep a document in the docs folder called modules.html(for example)
and there keep a record of supported and unsuppored modules(as sanjaya
suggested) In our distributions we don't give expat or libwww(or any
unspported module) until somebody actively involve working on a currently
unsupported module.
If there are bugs accumulating on an unsupported module, that means that
somebody finding bugs on it, and means somebody trying to use it. So he
can volunteer to fix these bugs. Accumulating bugs on an unsupported
module and not fixing it immediately is not a problem. Our aim is not to
keep jira clean of bug reports(I guess). Our aim of keeping Jira is as a
good informationa source(I guess)
thanks
damitha
> Considering that Xerces is less buggy and stable, and that Xerces is from
> Apache and Expat is not,
> I preffer Xerces.
> Additionally, now that we are going to have a TSPP, we are less likely to
> use Expat.
>
> So I am for the removal of Expat based lib, provided that there are couple
> of bugs in Expat based
> lib that were not being attended by any one for some time. Either should
> fix them or get rid of
> Expat based lib if we do not have people willing to maintain that lib.
>
> (we should minimize bugs hanging in Jira without being fixed and if the
> bugs are related to less
> used components for which we have better alternatives, always better to
> get rid of them - else
> time and effort spent on those are wasted.)
>
> Samisa...
>
> --- sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk> wrote:
>
>> Yes I noticed. If we choose to let that be, what shall be done with
>> XMLParserExpat?
>>
>> sanjaya.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Samisa Abeysinghe" <sa...@yahoo.com>
>> To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
>> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 12:42 PM
>> Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
>>
>>
>> > Thoughts on LibWWW transport came too late I guess. I have already
>> removed
>> it last week :(
>> > Samisa...
>> >
>> > --- sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk> wrote:
>> >
>> > > After thinking about this for some time, I also think I have to
>> agree
>> with
>> > > damitha. If someone does decide to maintain an unmaintained module
>> it
>> would
>> > > require some effort to get things going again. This could casue
>> hindrance to
>> > > a volunteer willing to take up maintainance of a certain module that
>> was
>> > > removed thereby discouraging them. Now I think the even the removal
>> from
>> > > build systems should be done in such a way so that they can be
>> re-added
>> > > easily later. e.g. Simply reomve a project from the vc workspace and
>> let
>> the
>> > > relevant project files stay where they are. If needed to reawaken
>> the
>> > > project simple add it back to the workspace. For make and ant...?
>> > >
>> > > So I suggest to keep a file say modules.txt at ws-axis/c.
>> > >
>> > > Here is something to start with. please correct any item as
>> necessary
>> > >
>> > > Module Role
>> > > Status
>> > >
>> > > Apache 1.3.X module Server Transport plugin
>> maintained
>> > > Apache 2.X module Server Transport plugin
>> maintained
>> > > Axis2Transport Core Component
>> > > maintained
>> > > AxisClient Core Component
>> > > maintained
>> > > AxisServer Core Component
>> > > maintained
>> > > AxisTransport Client Transport plugin
>> > > removed
>> > > AxisTransportLibwww Client Transport plugin
>> > > unmaintained
>> > > AxisXMLParserExpat XML Paser plugin
>> unmaintained
>> > > AxisXMLParserTspp XML Paser plugin
>> unmaintained
>> > > AxisXMLParserXerces XML Paser plugin
>> maintained
>> > > SimpleAxisServer Server Transport
>> > > maintained
>> > >
>> > > sanjaya.
>> > >
>> > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > From: "Damitha Kumarage" <da...@opensource.lk>
>> > > To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
>> > > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 6:46 PM
>> > > Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > Hi,
>> > > > I think we should only remove all refrences of unmaintained
>> modules
>> from
>> > > > all kind of build process(make ,ant, vc). But I prefer keeping
>> the
>> > > > source at cvs for the time being. That might help for interested
>> parties.
>> > > >
>> > > > regards
>> > > > damitha
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > +1 for documenting status of modules - where would we do this,
>> though a
>> > > > > cvs
>> > > > > readme or on the website?
>> > > > > Is there any way that we can remove libwww entirely from
>> the
>> src
>> > > > > tree
>> > > > > - does cvs allow you to find "deleted files" as some
>> repositories do
>> (I
>> > > > > don't know enough about how cvs works, sorry).
>> > > > >
>> > > > > +1 for build frameworks being updated so they now longer
>> reference
>> > > libwww
>> > > > > at all.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > John Hawkins
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > "sanjaya
>> > > > > singharage"
>> > > > > <sanjayas@opensou
>> > > To
>> > > > > rce.lk> "Apache AXIS C Developers
>> List"
>> > > > > <ax...@ws.apache.org>
>> > > > > 17/11/2004 04:10
>> > > cc
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > Subject
>> > > > > Please respond to Re: Do we need to keep
>> LibWWW
>> > > > > "Apache AXIS C transport updated
>> > > > > Developers List"
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > A question on infrastructure. The current active developers will
>> know
>> > > what
>> > > > > are being maintained and what are not. But for new people or for
>> the
>> > > sake
>> > > > > of
>> > > > > documenting it should we put it down somewhere as to the current
>> status
>> > > of
>> > > > > each module (i.e. whether they are being maintained or not) or
>> is
>> this
>> > > > > overkill?
>> > > > > Also what should be done for build frameworks (i.e. vc, ant,
>> make)
>> for
>> > > > > unmaintained modules? For example should we remove the libwww
>> transport
>> > > > > project from the Distribution workspace (while keeping the vc
>> projects
>> > > if
>> > > > > needed later)?
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > +1 for hibernating libwww transport.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > sanjaya.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > > > From: "John Hawkins" <HA...@uk.ibm.com>
>> > > > > To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
>> > > > > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 4:00 PM
>> > > > > Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> +1
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> John Hawkins
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Samisa Abeysinghe
>> > > > >> <samisa_abeysingh
>> > > > >> e@yahoo.com>
>> > > > > To
>> > > > >> axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org
>> > > > >> 15/11/2004 05:00
>> > > > > cc
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > > Subject
>> > > > >> Please respond to Do we need to keep
>> LibWWW
>> > > > > transport
>> > > > >> "Apache AXIS C updated
>> > > > >> Developers List"
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Hi All,
>> > > > >> I have done some major improvements to axis2 transport over
>> the
>> > > past
>>
> === message truncated ===
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
> http://my.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
--
Damitha Kumarage
hSenid Software International (PVT) Ltd
Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Posted by John Hawkins <HA...@uk.ibm.com>.
fyi: We use XML4C which is Xerces compiled with ICU4C. Therefore we use a
variant of Xerces and would continue to fix bugs with this parser.
John Hawkins
Samisa Abeysinghe
<samisa_abeysingh
e@yahoo.com> To
Apache AXIS C Developers List
22/11/2004 07:40 <ax...@ws.apache.org>
cc
Please respond to Subject
"Apache AXIS C Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW
Developers List" transport updated
Considering that Xerces is less buggy and stable, and that Xerces is from
Apache and Expat is not,
I preffer Xerces.
Additionally, now that we are going to have a TSPP, we are less likely to
use Expat.
So I am for the removal of Expat based lib, provided that there are couple
of bugs in Expat based
lib that were not being attended by any one for some time. Either should
fix them or get rid of
Expat based lib if we do not have people willing to maintain that lib.
(we should minimize bugs hanging in Jira without being fixed and if the
bugs are related to less
used components for which we have better alternatives, always better to get
rid of them - else
time and effort spent on those are wasted.)
Samisa...
--- sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> Yes I noticed. If we choose to let that be, what shall be done with
> XMLParserExpat?
>
> sanjaya.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Samisa Abeysinghe" <sa...@yahoo.com>
> To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 12:42 PM
> Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
>
>
> > Thoughts on LibWWW transport came too late I guess. I have already
removed
> it last week :(
> > Samisa...
> >
> > --- sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> >
> > > After thinking about this for some time, I also think I have to agree
> with
> > > damitha. If someone does decide to maintain an unmaintained module it
> would
> > > require some effort to get things going again. This could casue
> hindrance to
> > > a volunteer willing to take up maintainance of a certain module that
was
> > > removed thereby discouraging them. Now I think the even the removal
from
> > > build systems should be done in such a way so that they can be
re-added
> > > easily later. e.g. Simply reomve a project from the vc workspace and
let
> the
> > > relevant project files stay where they are. If needed to reawaken the
> > > project simple add it back to the workspace. For make and ant...?
> > >
> > > So I suggest to keep a file say modules.txt at ws-axis/c.
> > >
> > > Here is something to start with. please correct any item as necessary
> > >
> > > Module Role
> > > Status
> > >
> > > Apache 1.3.X module Server Transport plugin
> maintained
> > > Apache 2.X module Server Transport plugin
> maintained
> > > Axis2Transport Core Component
> > > maintained
> > > AxisClient Core Component
> > > maintained
> > > AxisServer Core Component
> > > maintained
> > > AxisTransport Client Transport plugin
> > > removed
> > > AxisTransportLibwww Client Transport plugin
> > > unmaintained
> > > AxisXMLParserExpat XML Paser plugin
> unmaintained
> > > AxisXMLParserTspp XML Paser plugin
> unmaintained
> > > AxisXMLParserXerces XML Paser plugin
> maintained
> > > SimpleAxisServer Server Transport
> > > maintained
> > >
> > > sanjaya.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Damitha Kumarage" <da...@opensource.lk>
> > > To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> > > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 6:46 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > > I think we should only remove all refrences of unmaintained modules
> from
> > > > all kind of build process(make ,ant, vc). But I prefer keeping
the
> > > > source at cvs for the time being. That might help for interested
> parties.
> > > >
> > > > regards
> > > > damitha
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > +1 for documenting status of modules - where would we do this,
> though a
> > > > > cvs
> > > > > readme or on the website?
> > > > > Is there any way that we can remove libwww entirely from
the
> src
> > > > > tree
> > > > > - does cvs allow you to find "deleted files" as some repositories
do
> (I
> > > > > don't know enough about how cvs works, sorry).
> > > > >
> > > > > +1 for build frameworks being updated so they now longer
reference
> > > libwww
> > > > > at all.
> > > > >
> > > > > John Hawkins
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "sanjaya
> > > > > singharage"
> > > > > <sanjayas@opensou
> > > To
> > > > > rce.lk> "Apache AXIS C Developers
> List"
> > > > > <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> > > > > 17/11/2004 04:10
> > > cc
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > Subject
> > > > > Please respond to Re: Do we need to keep
LibWWW
> > > > > "Apache AXIS C transport updated
> > > > > Developers List"
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > A question on infrastructure. The current active developers will
> know
> > > what
> > > > > are being maintained and what are not. But for new people or for
the
> > > sake
> > > > > of
> > > > > documenting it should we put it down somewhere as to the current
> status
> > > of
> > > > > each module (i.e. whether they are being maintained or not) or is
> this
> > > > > overkill?
> > > > > Also what should be done for build frameworks (i.e. vc, ant,
make)
> for
> > > > > unmaintained modules? For example should we remove the libwww
> transport
> > > > > project from the Distribution workspace (while keeping the vc
> projects
> > > if
> > > > > needed later)?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > +1 for hibernating libwww transport.
> > > > >
> > > > > sanjaya.
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "John Hawkins" <HA...@uk.ibm.com>
> > > > > To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> > > > > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 4:00 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> +1
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> John Hawkins
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Samisa Abeysinghe
> > > > >> <samisa_abeysingh
> > > > >> e@yahoo.com>
> > > > > To
> > > > >> axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org
> > > > >> 15/11/2004 05:00
> > > > > cc
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > > Subject
> > > > >> Please respond to Do we need to keep LibWWW
> > > > > transport
> > > > >> "Apache AXIS C updated
> > > > >> Developers List"
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Hi All,
> > > > >> I have done some major improvements to axis2 transport over
the
> > > past
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Posted by Samisa Abeysinghe <sa...@yahoo.com>.
Considering that Xerces is less buggy and stable, and that Xerces is from Apache and Expat is not,
I preffer Xerces.
Additionally, now that we are going to have a TSPP, we are less likely to use Expat.
So I am for the removal of Expat based lib, provided that there are couple of bugs in Expat based
lib that were not being attended by any one for some time. Either should fix them or get rid of
Expat based lib if we do not have people willing to maintain that lib.
(we should minimize bugs hanging in Jira without being fixed and if the bugs are related to less
used components for which we have better alternatives, always better to get rid of them - else
time and effort spent on those are wasted.)
Samisa...
--- sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> Yes I noticed. If we choose to let that be, what shall be done with
> XMLParserExpat?
>
> sanjaya.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Samisa Abeysinghe" <sa...@yahoo.com>
> To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 12:42 PM
> Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
>
>
> > Thoughts on LibWWW transport came too late I guess. I have already removed
> it last week :(
> > Samisa...
> >
> > --- sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> >
> > > After thinking about this for some time, I also think I have to agree
> with
> > > damitha. If someone does decide to maintain an unmaintained module it
> would
> > > require some effort to get things going again. This could casue
> hindrance to
> > > a volunteer willing to take up maintainance of a certain module that was
> > > removed thereby discouraging them. Now I think the even the removal from
> > > build systems should be done in such a way so that they can be re-added
> > > easily later. e.g. Simply reomve a project from the vc workspace and let
> the
> > > relevant project files stay where they are. If needed to reawaken the
> > > project simple add it back to the workspace. For make and ant...?
> > >
> > > So I suggest to keep a file say modules.txt at ws-axis/c.
> > >
> > > Here is something to start with. please correct any item as necessary
> > >
> > > Module Role
> > > Status
> > >
> > > Apache 1.3.X module Server Transport plugin
> maintained
> > > Apache 2.X module Server Transport plugin
> maintained
> > > Axis2Transport Core Component
> > > maintained
> > > AxisClient Core Component
> > > maintained
> > > AxisServer Core Component
> > > maintained
> > > AxisTransport Client Transport plugin
> > > removed
> > > AxisTransportLibwww Client Transport plugin
> > > unmaintained
> > > AxisXMLParserExpat XML Paser plugin
> unmaintained
> > > AxisXMLParserTspp XML Paser plugin
> unmaintained
> > > AxisXMLParserXerces XML Paser plugin
> maintained
> > > SimpleAxisServer Server Transport
> > > maintained
> > >
> > > sanjaya.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Damitha Kumarage" <da...@opensource.lk>
> > > To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> > > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 6:46 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > > I think we should only remove all refrences of unmaintained modules
> from
> > > > all kind of build process(make ,ant, vc). But I prefer keeping the
> > > > source at cvs for the time being. That might help for interested
> parties.
> > > >
> > > > regards
> > > > damitha
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > +1 for documenting status of modules - where would we do this,
> though a
> > > > > cvs
> > > > > readme or on the website?
> > > > > Is there any way that we can remove libwww entirely from the
> src
> > > > > tree
> > > > > - does cvs allow you to find "deleted files" as some repositories do
> (I
> > > > > don't know enough about how cvs works, sorry).
> > > > >
> > > > > +1 for build frameworks being updated so they now longer reference
> > > libwww
> > > > > at all.
> > > > >
> > > > > John Hawkins
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "sanjaya
> > > > > singharage"
> > > > > <sanjayas@opensou
> > > To
> > > > > rce.lk> "Apache AXIS C Developers
> List"
> > > > > <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> > > > > 17/11/2004 04:10
> > > cc
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > Subject
> > > > > Please respond to Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW
> > > > > "Apache AXIS C transport updated
> > > > > Developers List"
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > A question on infrastructure. The current active developers will
> know
> > > what
> > > > > are being maintained and what are not. But for new people or for the
> > > sake
> > > > > of
> > > > > documenting it should we put it down somewhere as to the current
> status
> > > of
> > > > > each module (i.e. whether they are being maintained or not) or is
> this
> > > > > overkill?
> > > > > Also what should be done for build frameworks (i.e. vc, ant, make)
> for
> > > > > unmaintained modules? For example should we remove the libwww
> transport
> > > > > project from the Distribution workspace (while keeping the vc
> projects
> > > if
> > > > > needed later)?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > +1 for hibernating libwww transport.
> > > > >
> > > > > sanjaya.
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "John Hawkins" <HA...@uk.ibm.com>
> > > > > To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> > > > > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 4:00 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> +1
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> John Hawkins
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Samisa Abeysinghe
> > > > >> <samisa_abeysingh
> > > > >> e@yahoo.com>
> > > > > To
> > > > >> axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org
> > > > >> 15/11/2004 05:00
> > > > > cc
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > > Subject
> > > > >> Please respond to Do we need to keep LibWWW
> > > > > transport
> > > > >> "Apache AXIS C updated
> > > > >> Developers List"
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Hi All,
> > > > >> I have done some major improvements to axis2 transport over the
> > > past
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Posted by sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk>.
Yes I noticed. If we choose to let that be, what shall be done with
XMLParserExpat?
sanjaya.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Samisa Abeysinghe" <sa...@yahoo.com>
To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 12:42 PM
Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
> Thoughts on LibWWW transport came too late I guess. I have already removed
it last week :(
> Samisa...
>
> --- sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk> wrote:
>
> > After thinking about this for some time, I also think I have to agree
with
> > damitha. If someone does decide to maintain an unmaintained module it
would
> > require some effort to get things going again. This could casue
hindrance to
> > a volunteer willing to take up maintainance of a certain module that was
> > removed thereby discouraging them. Now I think the even the removal from
> > build systems should be done in such a way so that they can be re-added
> > easily later. e.g. Simply reomve a project from the vc workspace and let
the
> > relevant project files stay where they are. If needed to reawaken the
> > project simple add it back to the workspace. For make and ant...?
> >
> > So I suggest to keep a file say modules.txt at ws-axis/c.
> >
> > Here is something to start with. please correct any item as necessary
> >
> > Module Role
> > Status
> >
> > Apache 1.3.X module Server Transport plugin
maintained
> > Apache 2.X module Server Transport plugin
maintained
> > Axis2Transport Core Component
> > maintained
> > AxisClient Core Component
> > maintained
> > AxisServer Core Component
> > maintained
> > AxisTransport Client Transport plugin
> > removed
> > AxisTransportLibwww Client Transport plugin
> > unmaintained
> > AxisXMLParserExpat XML Paser plugin
unmaintained
> > AxisXMLParserTspp XML Paser plugin
unmaintained
> > AxisXMLParserXerces XML Paser plugin
maintained
> > SimpleAxisServer Server Transport
> > maintained
> >
> > sanjaya.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Damitha Kumarage" <da...@opensource.lk>
> > To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 6:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
> >
> >
> > > Hi,
> > > I think we should only remove all refrences of unmaintained modules
from
> > > all kind of build process(make ,ant, vc). But I prefer keeping the
> > > source at cvs for the time being. That might help for interested
parties.
> > >
> > > regards
> > > damitha
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > +1 for documenting status of modules - where would we do this,
though a
> > > > cvs
> > > > readme or on the website?
> > > > Is there any way that we can remove libwww entirely from the
src
> > > > tree
> > > > - does cvs allow you to find "deleted files" as some repositories do
(I
> > > > don't know enough about how cvs works, sorry).
> > > >
> > > > +1 for build frameworks being updated so they now longer reference
> > libwww
> > > > at all.
> > > >
> > > > John Hawkins
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "sanjaya
> > > > singharage"
> > > > <sanjayas@opensou
> > To
> > > > rce.lk> "Apache AXIS C Developers
List"
> > > > <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> > > > 17/11/2004 04:10
> > cc
> > > >
> > > >
> > Subject
> > > > Please respond to Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW
> > > > "Apache AXIS C transport updated
> > > > Developers List"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > A question on infrastructure. The current active developers will
know
> > what
> > > > are being maintained and what are not. But for new people or for the
> > sake
> > > > of
> > > > documenting it should we put it down somewhere as to the current
status
> > of
> > > > each module (i.e. whether they are being maintained or not) or is
this
> > > > overkill?
> > > > Also what should be done for build frameworks (i.e. vc, ant, make)
for
> > > > unmaintained modules? For example should we remove the libwww
transport
> > > > project from the Distribution workspace (while keeping the vc
projects
> > if
> > > > needed later)?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > +1 for hibernating libwww transport.
> > > >
> > > > sanjaya.
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "John Hawkins" <HA...@uk.ibm.com>
> > > > To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> > > > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 4:00 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> +1
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> John Hawkins
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Samisa Abeysinghe
> > > >> <samisa_abeysingh
> > > >> e@yahoo.com>
> > > > To
> > > >> axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org
> > > >> 15/11/2004 05:00
> > > > cc
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > > Subject
> > > >> Please respond to Do we need to keep LibWWW
> > > > transport
> > > >> "Apache AXIS C updated
> > > >> Developers List"
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi All,
> > > >> I have done some major improvements to axis2 transport over the
> > past
> > > >> couple of weeks (e.g.
> > > >> cookie support and keep alive support etc.)
> > > >>
> > > >> I did not update the LibWWW transport in line with those
changes.
> > > >> I feel that it is a burden to keep updating LibWWW based
transport
> > > >> as
> > > >> well (unless someone
> > > >> voulenteers to do so)
> > > >>
> > > >> Hence I have assumed we are only using axis2 transport from 1.4
> > > >> onwards. Is that fair enough?
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >> Samisa...
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> __________________________________
> > > >> Do you Yahoo!?
> > > >> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
> > > >> www.yahoo.com
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Damitha Kumarage
> > > hSenid Software International (PVT) Ltd
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
> http://my.yahoo.com
>
>
>
Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Posted by Samisa Abeysinghe <sa...@yahoo.com>.
Thoughts on LibWWW transport came too late I guess. I have already removed it last week :(
Samisa...
--- sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk> wrote:
> After thinking about this for some time, I also think I have to agree with
> damitha. If someone does decide to maintain an unmaintained module it would
> require some effort to get things going again. This could casue hindrance to
> a volunteer willing to take up maintainance of a certain module that was
> removed thereby discouraging them. Now I think the even the removal from
> build systems should be done in such a way so that they can be re-added
> easily later. e.g. Simply reomve a project from the vc workspace and let the
> relevant project files stay where they are. If needed to reawaken the
> project simple add it back to the workspace. For make and ant...?
>
> So I suggest to keep a file say modules.txt at ws-axis/c.
>
> Here is something to start with. please correct any item as necessary
>
> Module Role
> Status
>
> Apache 1.3.X module Server Transport plugin maintained
> Apache 2.X module Server Transport plugin maintained
> Axis2Transport Core Component
> maintained
> AxisClient Core Component
> maintained
> AxisServer Core Component
> maintained
> AxisTransport Client Transport plugin
> removed
> AxisTransportLibwww Client Transport plugin
> unmaintained
> AxisXMLParserExpat XML Paser plugin unmaintained
> AxisXMLParserTspp XML Paser plugin unmaintained
> AxisXMLParserXerces XML Paser plugin maintained
> SimpleAxisServer Server Transport
> maintained
>
> sanjaya.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Damitha Kumarage" <da...@opensource.lk>
> To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 6:46 PM
> Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
>
>
> > Hi,
> > I think we should only remove all refrences of unmaintained modules from
> > all kind of build process(make ,ant, vc). But I prefer keeping the
> > source at cvs for the time being. That might help for interested parties.
> >
> > regards
> > damitha
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > +1 for documenting status of modules - where would we do this, though a
> > > cvs
> > > readme or on the website?
> > > Is there any way that we can remove libwww entirely from the src
> > > tree
> > > - does cvs allow you to find "deleted files" as some repositories do (I
> > > don't know enough about how cvs works, sorry).
> > >
> > > +1 for build frameworks being updated so they now longer reference
> libwww
> > > at all.
> > >
> > > John Hawkins
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "sanjaya
> > > singharage"
> > > <sanjayas@opensou
> To
> > > rce.lk> "Apache AXIS C Developers List"
> > > <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> > > 17/11/2004 04:10
> cc
> > >
> > >
> Subject
> > > Please respond to Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW
> > > "Apache AXIS C transport updated
> > > Developers List"
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > A question on infrastructure. The current active developers will know
> what
> > > are being maintained and what are not. But for new people or for the
> sake
> > > of
> > > documenting it should we put it down somewhere as to the current status
> of
> > > each module (i.e. whether they are being maintained or not) or is this
> > > overkill?
> > > Also what should be done for build frameworks (i.e. vc, ant, make) for
> > > unmaintained modules? For example should we remove the libwww transport
> > > project from the Distribution workspace (while keeping the vc projects
> if
> > > needed later)?
> > >
> > >
> > > +1 for hibernating libwww transport.
> > >
> > > sanjaya.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "John Hawkins" <HA...@uk.ibm.com>
> > > To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> > > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 4:00 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> John Hawkins
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Samisa Abeysinghe
> > >> <samisa_abeysingh
> > >> e@yahoo.com>
> > > To
> > >> axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org
> > >> 15/11/2004 05:00
> > > cc
> > >>
> > >>
> > > Subject
> > >> Please respond to Do we need to keep LibWWW
> > > transport
> > >> "Apache AXIS C updated
> > >> Developers List"
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Hi All,
> > >> I have done some major improvements to axis2 transport over the
> past
> > >> couple of weeks (e.g.
> > >> cookie support and keep alive support etc.)
> > >>
> > >> I did not update the LibWWW transport in line with those changes.
> > >> I feel that it is a burden to keep updating LibWWW based transport
> > >> as
> > >> well (unless someone
> > >> voulenteers to do so)
> > >>
> > >> Hence I have assumed we are only using axis2 transport from 1.4
> > >> onwards. Is that fair enough?
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Samisa...
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> __________________________________
> > >> Do you Yahoo!?
> > >> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
> > >> www.yahoo.com
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Damitha Kumarage
> > hSenid Software International (PVT) Ltd
> >
>
>
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Posted by sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk>.
After thinking about this for some time, I also think I have to agree with
damitha. If someone does decide to maintain an unmaintained module it would
require some effort to get things going again. This could casue hindrance to
a volunteer willing to take up maintainance of a certain module that was
removed thereby discouraging them. Now I think the even the removal from
build systems should be done in such a way so that they can be re-added
easily later. e.g. Simply reomve a project from the vc workspace and let the
relevant project files stay where they are. If needed to reawaken the
project simple add it back to the workspace. For make and ant...?
So I suggest to keep a file say modules.txt at ws-axis/c.
Here is something to start with. please correct any item as necessary
Module Role
Status
Apache 1.3.X module Server Transport plugin maintained
Apache 2.X module Server Transport plugin maintained
Axis2Transport Core Component
maintained
AxisClient Core Component
maintained
AxisServer Core Component
maintained
AxisTransport Client Transport plugin
removed
AxisTransportLibwww Client Transport plugin
unmaintained
AxisXMLParserExpat XML Paser plugin unmaintained
AxisXMLParserTspp XML Paser plugin unmaintained
AxisXMLParserXerces XML Paser plugin maintained
SimpleAxisServer Server Transport
maintained
sanjaya.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Damitha Kumarage" <da...@opensource.lk>
To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
> Hi,
> I think we should only remove all refrences of unmaintained modules from
> all kind of build process(make ,ant, vc). But I prefer keeping the
> source at cvs for the time being. That might help for interested parties.
>
> regards
> damitha
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > +1 for documenting status of modules - where would we do this, though a
> > cvs
> > readme or on the website?
> > Is there any way that we can remove libwww entirely from the src
> > tree
> > - does cvs allow you to find "deleted files" as some repositories do (I
> > don't know enough about how cvs works, sorry).
> >
> > +1 for build frameworks being updated so they now longer reference
libwww
> > at all.
> >
> > John Hawkins
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "sanjaya
> > singharage"
> > <sanjayas@opensou
To
> > rce.lk> "Apache AXIS C Developers List"
> > <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> > 17/11/2004 04:10
cc
> >
> >
Subject
> > Please respond to Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW
> > "Apache AXIS C transport updated
> > Developers List"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > A question on infrastructure. The current active developers will know
what
> > are being maintained and what are not. But for new people or for the
sake
> > of
> > documenting it should we put it down somewhere as to the current status
of
> > each module (i.e. whether they are being maintained or not) or is this
> > overkill?
> > Also what should be done for build frameworks (i.e. vc, ant, make) for
> > unmaintained modules? For example should we remove the libwww transport
> > project from the Distribution workspace (while keeping the vc projects
if
> > needed later)?
> >
> >
> > +1 for hibernating libwww transport.
> >
> > sanjaya.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "John Hawkins" <HA...@uk.ibm.com>
> > To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 4:00 PM
> > Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >>
> >> John Hawkins
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Samisa Abeysinghe
> >> <samisa_abeysingh
> >> e@yahoo.com>
> > To
> >> axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org
> >> 15/11/2004 05:00
> > cc
> >>
> >>
> > Subject
> >> Please respond to Do we need to keep LibWWW
> > transport
> >> "Apache AXIS C updated
> >> Developers List"
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi All,
> >> I have done some major improvements to axis2 transport over the
past
> >> couple of weeks (e.g.
> >> cookie support and keep alive support etc.)
> >>
> >> I did not update the LibWWW transport in line with those changes.
> >> I feel that it is a burden to keep updating LibWWW based transport
> >> as
> >> well (unless someone
> >> voulenteers to do so)
> >>
> >> Hence I have assumed we are only using axis2 transport from 1.4
> >> onwards. Is that fair enough?
> >> Thanks,
> >> Samisa...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> __________________________________
> >> Do you Yahoo!?
> >> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
> >> www.yahoo.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Damitha Kumarage
> hSenid Software International (PVT) Ltd
>
Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Posted by Damitha Kumarage <da...@opensource.lk>.
Hi,
I think we should only remove all refrences of unmaintained modules from
all kind of build process(make ,ant, vc). But I prefer keeping the
source at cvs for the time being. That might help for interested parties.
regards
damitha
>
>
>
>
> +1 for documenting status of modules - where would we do this, though a
> cvs
> readme or on the website?
> Is there any way that we can remove libwww entirely from the src
> tree
> - does cvs allow you to find "deleted files" as some repositories do (I
> don't know enough about how cvs works, sorry).
>
> +1 for build frameworks being updated so they now longer reference libwww
> at all.
>
> John Hawkins
>
>
>
>
>
> "sanjaya
> singharage"
> <sanjayas@opensou To
> rce.lk> "Apache AXIS C Developers List"
> <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> 17/11/2004 04:10 cc
>
> Subject
> Please respond to Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW
> "Apache AXIS C transport updated
> Developers List"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> A question on infrastructure. The current active developers will know what
> are being maintained and what are not. But for new people or for the sake
> of
> documenting it should we put it down somewhere as to the current status of
> each module (i.e. whether they are being maintained or not) or is this
> overkill?
> Also what should be done for build frameworks (i.e. vc, ant, make) for
> unmaintained modules? For example should we remove the libwww transport
> project from the Distribution workspace (while keeping the vc projects if
> needed later)?
>
>
> +1 for hibernating libwww transport.
>
> sanjaya.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Hawkins" <HA...@uk.ibm.com>
> To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 4:00 PM
> Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> +1
>>
>>
>> John Hawkins
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Samisa Abeysinghe
>> <samisa_abeysingh
>> e@yahoo.com>
> To
>> axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org
>> 15/11/2004 05:00
> cc
>>
>>
> Subject
>> Please respond to Do we need to keep LibWWW
> transport
>> "Apache AXIS C updated
>> Developers List"
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi All,
>> I have done some major improvements to axis2 transport over the past
>> couple of weeks (e.g.
>> cookie support and keep alive support etc.)
>>
>> I did not update the LibWWW transport in line with those changes.
>> I feel that it is a burden to keep updating LibWWW based transport
>> as
>> well (unless someone
>> voulenteers to do so)
>>
>> Hence I have assumed we are only using axis2 transport from 1.4
>> onwards. Is that fair enough?
>> Thanks,
>> Samisa...
>>
>>
>>
>> __________________________________
>> Do you Yahoo!?
>> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
>> www.yahoo.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Damitha Kumarage
hSenid Software International (PVT) Ltd
Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Posted by Samisa Abeysinghe <sa...@yahoo.com>.
Doc on module status: It is painfull to update the website regularly. Hence I preffer keeping
module updates in README or some other file in CVS. (I think this is mostly used by developers -
so make sense to keep it in cvs)
+1 re removing LibWWW completely. (If all are OK with it, I can rmove it)
Yes you can find (and checkout) deleted files from CVS. CVS has histry info. For e.g. I removedd
axis transport and the link shows the dead files.
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/ws-axis/c/src/transport/axis/
Thanks,
Samisa...
--- John Hawkins <HA...@uk.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> +1 for documenting status of modules - where would we do this, though a cvs
> readme or on the website?
> Is there any way that we can remove libwww entirely from the src tree
> - does cvs allow you to find "deleted files" as some repositories do (I
> don't know enough about how cvs works, sorry).
>
> +1 for build frameworks being updated so they now longer reference libwww
> at all.
>
> John Hawkins
>
>
>
>
>
> "sanjaya
> singharage"
> <sanjayas@opensou To
> rce.lk> "Apache AXIS C Developers List"
> <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> 17/11/2004 04:10 cc
>
> Subject
> Please respond to Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW
> "Apache AXIS C transport updated
> Developers List"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> A question on infrastructure. The current active developers will know what
> are being maintained and what are not. But for new people or for the sake
> of
> documenting it should we put it down somewhere as to the current status of
> each module (i.e. whether they are being maintained or not) or is this
> overkill?
> Also what should be done for build frameworks (i.e. vc, ant, make) for
> unmaintained modules? For example should we remove the libwww transport
> project from the Distribution workspace (while keeping the vc projects if
> needed later)?
>
>
> +1 for hibernating libwww transport.
>
> sanjaya.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Hawkins" <HA...@uk.ibm.com>
> To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 4:00 PM
> Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > +1
> >
> >
> > John Hawkins
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Samisa Abeysinghe
> > <samisa_abeysingh
> > e@yahoo.com>
> To
> > axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org
> > 15/11/2004 05:00
> cc
> >
> >
> Subject
> > Please respond to Do we need to keep LibWWW
> transport
> > "Apache AXIS C updated
> > Developers List"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi All,
> > I have done some major improvements to axis2 transport over the past
> > couple of weeks (e.g.
> > cookie support and keep alive support etc.)
> >
> > I did not update the LibWWW transport in line with those changes.
> > I feel that it is a burden to keep updating LibWWW based transport as
> > well (unless someone
> > voulenteers to do so)
> >
> > Hence I have assumed we are only using axis2 transport from 1.4
> > onwards. Is that fair enough?
> > Thanks,
> > Samisa...
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
> > www.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com
Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Posted by John Hawkins <HA...@uk.ibm.com>.
+1 for documenting status of modules - where would we do this, though a cvs
readme or on the website?
Is there any way that we can remove libwww entirely from the src tree
- does cvs allow you to find "deleted files" as some repositories do (I
don't know enough about how cvs works, sorry).
+1 for build frameworks being updated so they now longer reference libwww
at all.
John Hawkins
"sanjaya
singharage"
<sanjayas@opensou To
rce.lk> "Apache AXIS C Developers List"
<ax...@ws.apache.org>
17/11/2004 04:10 cc
Subject
Please respond to Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW
"Apache AXIS C transport updated
Developers List"
A question on infrastructure. The current active developers will know what
are being maintained and what are not. But for new people or for the sake
of
documenting it should we put it down somewhere as to the current status of
each module (i.e. whether they are being maintained or not) or is this
overkill?
Also what should be done for build frameworks (i.e. vc, ant, make) for
unmaintained modules? For example should we remove the libwww transport
project from the Distribution workspace (while keeping the vc projects if
needed later)?
+1 for hibernating libwww transport.
sanjaya.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hawkins" <HA...@uk.ibm.com>
To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 4:00 PM
Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
>
>
>
>
> +1
>
>
> John Hawkins
>
>
>
>
>
> Samisa Abeysinghe
> <samisa_abeysingh
> e@yahoo.com>
To
> axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org
> 15/11/2004 05:00
cc
>
>
Subject
> Please respond to Do we need to keep LibWWW
transport
> "Apache AXIS C updated
> Developers List"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi All,
> I have done some major improvements to axis2 transport over the past
> couple of weeks (e.g.
> cookie support and keep alive support etc.)
>
> I did not update the LibWWW transport in line with those changes.
> I feel that it is a burden to keep updating LibWWW based transport as
> well (unless someone
> voulenteers to do so)
>
> Hence I have assumed we are only using axis2 transport from 1.4
> onwards. Is that fair enough?
> Thanks,
> Samisa...
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
> www.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Posted by sanjaya singharage <sa...@opensource.lk>.
A question on infrastructure. The current active developers will know what
are being maintained and what are not. But for new people or for the sake of
documenting it should we put it down somewhere as to the current status of
each module (i.e. whether they are being maintained or not) or is this
overkill?
Also what should be done for build frameworks (i.e. vc, ant, make) for
unmaintained modules? For example should we remove the libwww transport
project from the Distribution workspace (while keeping the vc projects if
needed later)?
+1 for hibernating libwww transport.
sanjaya.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hawkins" <HA...@uk.ibm.com>
To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <ax...@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 4:00 PM
Subject: Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
>
>
>
>
> +1
>
>
> John Hawkins
>
>
>
>
>
> Samisa Abeysinghe
> <samisa_abeysingh
> e@yahoo.com> To
> axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org
> 15/11/2004 05:00 cc
>
> Subject
> Please respond to Do we need to keep LibWWW transport
> "Apache AXIS C updated
> Developers List"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi All,
> I have done some major improvements to axis2 transport over the past
> couple of weeks (e.g.
> cookie support and keep alive support etc.)
>
> I did not update the LibWWW transport in line with those changes.
> I feel that it is a burden to keep updating LibWWW based transport as
> well (unless someone
> voulenteers to do so)
>
> Hence I have assumed we are only using axis2 transport from 1.4
> onwards. Is that fair enough?
> Thanks,
> Samisa...
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
> www.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Do we need to keep LibWWW transport updated
Posted by John Hawkins <HA...@uk.ibm.com>.
+1
John Hawkins
Samisa Abeysinghe
<samisa_abeysingh
e@yahoo.com> To
axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org
15/11/2004 05:00 cc
Subject
Please respond to Do we need to keep LibWWW transport
"Apache AXIS C updated
Developers List"
Hi All,
I have done some major improvements to axis2 transport over the past
couple of weeks (e.g.
cookie support and keep alive support etc.)
I did not update the LibWWW transport in line with those changes.
I feel that it is a burden to keep updating LibWWW based transport as
well (unless someone
voulenteers to do so)
Hence I have assumed we are only using axis2 transport from 1.4
onwards. Is that fair enough?
Thanks,
Samisa...
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com