How stable are the stubs and skeletons?

["Clover, James" <Ja...@disney.com>]

Hi all,

I have my own "lite" WSRP implementation that just went to production.
More code will be going to production based on WSRP, but I don't want to
get into a situation where I have a bunch of services running off of my
implementation only to have to make a big interface change to bring in
WSRP4J.

So my question is this: how stable are the "interface" classes?  By this
I mean the Axis stubs, type-mapping classes, etc.  My thought is I could
avoid a bunch of rework by using the WSRP4J interface classes so at
least my interfaces were compliant.

Thanks,
James

Re: How stable are the stubs and skeletons?

[Richard Jacob <ja...@apache.org>]

Clover, James wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>I have my own "lite" WSRP implementation that just went to production.
>More code will be going to production based on WSRP, but I don't want to
>get into a situation where I have a bunch of services running off of my
>implementation only to have to make a big interface change to bring in
>WSRP4J.
>
>So my question is this: how stable are the "interface" classes?  By this
>I mean the Axis stubs, type-mapping classes, etc.  My thought is I could
>avoid a bunch of rework by using the WSRP4J interface classes so at
>least my interfaces were compliant.
>  
>
They should remain pretty stable since they are generated from the wsrp 
v1 wsdls.

Richard