yes, it is easier when handlers have to be added only to the predefined phases. The users will be able to add the module by a simple drag & drop.
But since these phases are named in a generic manner (not as RMPhase SecurityPhase etc) it will be very common for handlers from various modules to end up in the same phase.
But there are cases where we want to make sure that handlers are invoked in a specific order. (for e.g. RM + Security).
This will increase the usage of the phase order feature. But current phase order implementation only offers simple functionalities (for e.g. we cannot say a RM Inflow Handler have to be after the two addressing handlers, when they are in the same phase).
Is it possible to make this feature a bit advance. I think it will be quite useful.
Thanks.
Chamikara
On 3/8/06, Deepal jayasinghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all;
I added generic phases for each flow (as operation predefined phase) ,
so if some module author specially Sandesha , WS-Security and addressing
want to add handlers to operation phase its better if they are going use
those phase . Otherwise if some one want to add new module he has to
edit axis2.xml (if module want to add new phase as I know Sandesha dose
so) , for me its not good for axis2.
I just came up with some phase names , if you guys not happy with pls
help me to improve that.
inflow
OperationInPhase
outflow
OperationOutPhase
inFaultFlow
OperationInFaultPhase
outFaultFlow
OperationOutFaultPhase
N:B – This does not mean that module can not add new phase
--
Thanks,
Deepal
................................................................
~Future is Open~
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
