Nice to hear it Jeremy! +1, lets separate it :) Thanks Srinath On 1/31/06, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1. let's do it :) > > -- dims > > On 1/31/06, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Paul Fremantle wrote: > > > I think there is more benefit to this than just the WS-Policy. > > > > > > For example, AXIOM could be used by any of a number of projects that need > > > a > > > lazily-built tree. In Synapse, we use AXIOM extensively just to parse our > > > config. And also, although Synapse has a heavy dependency on Axis2, the > > > core > > > model of Synapse was built to only depend on AXIOM. So I think this is > > > worth > > > doing now. > > > > > > It also seems to me that Axiom is pretty stable, which motivates it. > > > > > > But I agree, Dims, if that was the only reason, then it would be simple to > > > fix. But the circular dependency is just an outcome of AXIOM getting wider > > > usage as an XML model > > > > > > > Tuscany may also want to use AXIOM in an implementation of SDO2. > > Although the SCA implementation is migrating to Axis2, it would be > > better if the SDO part could just pick up AXIOM. It would help if it was > > available separately. > > > > -- > > Jeremy > > > > > > > -- > Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/ >
-- ============================ Srinath Perera: http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~hperera/ http://www.bloglines.com/blog/hemapani
