Hi Guillaume, In short, I'm interrested to contribute for a new Axis tool (like > WSDL2Java) taking into account the jaxrpc mapping file.
JAX-RPC mapping file is a requirement for JSR109 spec we have to support it anyway I think. > After dev, this > tool should be integrated/used into JOnAS as well as Geronimo... > > What do you think ? sure :) we are more than happy to have your help .. I remember you mention there are some part of code you have which might be reused in a JSR109 impl as well. here is architecture propsal (you might have seen) http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/~hemapani/JSR109/architecture.html yap and if my understanding is correct this can be used in the JOnAs as well as geranimo. (actually in that way it depends on the J2EE spec not the container. My only concern is will it be a big performence penalty as we do first an HTTP/SOAP access(web service layer) then RMI accsess.(axis to container) / if this is a problem we can use Local inteface instead of Remote interface(just a idea)) that is something I really need to discuss. Srinath On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 14:11, Guillaume Sauthier wrote: > Hello > > I'm already working on an Axis integration in a J2EE server (JOnAS) for > a JSR109 implementation. And we found some axis limitations : > - jaxrpc mapping cannot be completely supported (only package mapping > and xml type mapping at this time). All stuff concerning class > generation (class mapping, method mapping) cannot be handled directly > with WSDL2Java. > - cannot change endpoint address of a port through the ServiceLocator > interface. (issu patched recently in CVS) > > In short, I'm interrested to contribute for a new Axis tool (like > WSDL2Java) taking into account the jaxrpc mapping file. After dev, this > tool should be integrated/used into JOnAS as well as Geronimo... > > What do you think ? > > Regards > Guillaume > > > Srinath Perera wrote: > > > > Hi Dims, > > > > we agree the changes to axis should be minimal (preferably no changes.) > > > > How we thought about the project is like this .... > > > > 1) JSR109 implementation is a tool in axis(like WSDL2Java) which > > generates a web service that wraps the J2EE components.(a web service > > that do the lookup and map webservice SEI methods to the EJB ...etc ) > > It creates a web service that wrap the EJB using the WSDL and the > > webservice.xml > > > > 2)It needs minimal changes to axis (our code is a tool just like > > WSDL2Java lets say WSDL2J2EE or something). > > > > 3) with this tool the axis become JSR109 compliant and the J2EE > > container is Geronimo. > > > > In that case we prefer to stay close with axis. just like a tool > > (independent piece of code) :) > > > > Srianth > > > > On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 16:01, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > > > Srinath, > > > > > > The more i think about this, the more i am convinced that most of the work > > > should be done in > > > geronimo with minimum changes to axis itself. Since there needs to be tight > > > integration with > > > Geronimo and the target is to provide a 109 impl for geronimo. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > dims > > > > > > --- Srinath Perera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > There is a wiki proposal page created for the JSR109 implementation. > > > > it can be found by url > > > > > > > > http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?JSR109Proposal > > > > > > > > Srinath > > > > > > > > > > > > > ===== > > > Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/ > > > >
