On Dec 27, 2007 9:38 PM, Deepal Jayasinghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/27/07, David Illsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Glen,
> > It's just as well I saw you volunteering and didn't do it as well,
> > 'cos I was tempted :-)
>
> :)
>
> So that is why I implement that :)
>
>
> >
> > +1 to your more advanced options in general terms.
> >
> > Do you have a defined behaviour when multiple modules define phases
> > with the same name, or with the same name as a statically defined
> > phase? Presumably the first/static declaration wins and you trace out
> > the multiple declaration failure?
>
> In my implementation if two modules try to add the same phase then th fist
> win.
I happened to look at the axis2.xml and saw still all the phases are there.
After this commit I think
axis2.xml must be cleaned up and only Transport and Dispatch phases must be
there.
What do you mean by wining and loosing at the above statement.
Lets take this scenario.
Addressing module define a phase called 'Addressing' and Sandesha module
wants to add a handler to the
this Addressing phase. Can this be archived? If so how are we going to
write the two module.xml s?
Currently sandesha module.xml has this phase rule.
<handler name="SequenceIDDispatcher"
class="org.apache.sandesha2.handlers.SequenceIDDispatcher">
<order phase="Addressing" before="AddressingBasedDispatcher" />
</handler>
thanks,
Amila.
>
> -Deepal
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
Amila Suriarachchi,
WSO2 Inc.
