Yeah, but that doesn't matter. The spec modules are separate from rest of the Geronimo code so we can still move the API modules but they wouldn't be used in the Geronimo server right away.
Jarek On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:19 AM, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Jarek, > > +1 to move the spec jars, now that they are pretty stable and have gone > thru the TCK's. One question there is Geronimo > is still on JAXWS 2.0. So that may be a block. > > - -- dims > > > > Jarek Gawor wrote: > | I don't see that as a good reason to move these API classes into > | kernel. In fact, in my opinion that makes things more confusing. I > | think keeping these things separate is cleaner, easier to understand, > | and more reusable. Another thing to understand is that these are API > | classes which are far more stable then rest of the Axis2 code. > | Therefore, they should really have their own releases separate from > | Axis2 releases (something we do in Geronimo). Also, like Dims said, in > | Java 6 these API classes are provided by the JVM, so why would you > | want to have these classes in the kernel jar even though they will not > | be used at runtime (unless you want to start creating Java-specific > | versions of the kernel jar). > | > | On related note, at one point I suggested moving all the Axis2 API > | modules (saaj-api, jws-api, jaxws-api) into Geronimo (into specs). I > | still think that's a good idea and maybe it would be good to > | reconsider. As I mentioned before, there is no good reason why these > | modules should be compiled everytime you build Axis2 and there is no > | reason to release these modules with each Axis2 release. And if we > | move these API modules into Geronimo specs, these modules could nicely > | be reused in a number of other Apache projects such as CXF, Geronimo, > | Harmony, etc. > | > | Jarek > | > | On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 8:07 AM, Deepal jayasinghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > |> Hi all, > |> When I was removing annogen dependency I realized that importance of > |> moving JWS-API into the kernel. The reason is that those classes are > used > |> many places in Axis2, so having them in the kernel is much easier than > |> adding one more dependency to JWS-API. > |> > |> Thoughts ... ? > |> > |> Thank you! > |> Deepal > |> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > |> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > |> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > |> > |> > | > | --------------------------------------------------------------------- > | To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > | For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > | > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin) > > iD8DBQFIIGj9gNg6eWEDv1kRAo02AKCwG67AqkJh3bPI0Kp7SB+AYFd0DACfY7ic > 24XRfv/FUJEElvVDWR7A3T0= > =nIWB > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
