hi deepal, As I have said in my previous mail, I am not saying we MUST do it. Basically I have given my thoughts regarding the dynamic phases. As you have told if some one going to add it to Axis2 2.x. :)
As I have told earlier as well I am ok with going to Axis2 1.4 with either only static phases or with the improvement you have done. thanks, Amila. On Jan 2, 2008 9:33 AM, Deepal jayasinghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > hi all, > > > > First of all I don't see any problem of packaging default phases in a > > separate module. What is the advantage we get by putting them in > > axis2.xml? > > > Well we should not forget that we have release Axis2 1.3 and doing such > a major changes after that kind of release is not good thing. And we > should not forget about the backward compatibility. I have no object of > doing that if we have not done Axis2 1.0 and Axis2 is not in production. > > The major problem I saw here is users are expecting fixes to be in the > next release but will they use than when there are a number of such > critical changes. So I am +1 on keeping what we have now (no changes to > Axis2.xml) and have the dynamic phase support if someone want to add a > new phases. Second if we are going to change this kind of changes let's > do Axis2 2.0 not 1.4. > > if we keep the existing phases in the axis2.xml then we can not stop > > the fact that people want to change the axis2.xml time to time. > :) , why not if they want they will change axis2.xml or if they like > they will use dynamic phases. > > This > > is the main idea of going for dynamic phases. > Nope . > > For an example now > > Security phase is before dispatch phase. if security people wants to > > move it after dispatch phase still they wants to change the axis2.xml. > > > yes , if that is the case we can remove security phase from axis2.xml. I > am -1 on removing Dispatch phase and other predefined phases from > axis2.xml (I am sorry for my -1) > > the only way to get rid of this problem is to define phases only in > > module.xml. > > > > On the other hand if we define some phases in axis2.xml and others in > > module.xml then it may confuse people. > Yes whole idea of Dynamic phases confuse both the run time and the > system administrators :) > That is why I still think if we want to add a new phase need to change > axis2.xml :) > > for an example now there are > > three security phases in axis2.xml and we are going to say add the > > last one to security module.xml. > > > Nope , let's remove all of them > > Therefore I think better to have either dynamic phases or static > > phases rather than both. > may be but I am -1 on removing the phase from axis2.xml > > -Deepal > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Amila Suriarachchi, WSO2 Inc.
