Sanjiva, I disagree...i object to being characterized as "you made the decision on your own". I asked for status quo w.r.t behavior that was present in earlier versions.
thanks, dims On 1/2/06, Sanjiva Weerawarana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2006-01-02 at 00:15 -0500, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > > You mean, you will keep asking for a re-VOTE till every one agrees? :) > > Wish there was a re-vote mechanism right now where i live, there is a > > certain president... :) :) > > :). > > > But seriously, if you are so keen on it, please control the behavior > > with a switch in say axis2.xml, then convince a few people who have > > voted against it that it's a good idea to keep it switched on all the > > time. So let's do that for 0.94. We can revisit this with another VOTE > > in a few weeks. sounds like a plan? > > I'm talking about the behavior of a stub .. so the only place to have it > user settable would be in Options to have a setMaintainSession() method, > not in axis2.xml. > > I don't want to call for a re-VOTE. I'm satisfied we've at least > discussed my concerns and have heard from quite a few people now. I'm > happy to agree to letting it go for 0.94 and then see whether we get any > feedback. Hey if everyone out there is happy with client-side transport > sessions being off by default who am I to complain?! > > > Please do remember that this VOTE was started because of your -1 to a > > check-in that i made. The effort was to gauge how many people thought > > that your opinion was the right one and to make a decision as a team > > because we had *NOT* discussed it on the dev list as to what the right > > behavior was/should-be. > > Right- so just like my -1 you made the decision on your own to have it > one way .. at least now we've had the discussion and I hope you and > others see the merits of both arguments. > > Sanjiva. > > -- Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
