+1 sounds good! On 1/14/06, Sanjiva Weerawarana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think in reality WSIF is a very stable piece of code for what it does > and what it works with ... hence the lack of code changes. We should be > careful to not confuse that with a dead project! > > So looking to the future of WSIF- I have a grad student doing a project > with me who's trying to do a WSIF2 type thing using AXIOM and Axis2. > Basically the idea is to try to do what WSIFMessage did using AXIOM > directly in a WSDL2 compliant kind of manner. That is, if we were doing > WSIF with WSDL2 in mind and with AXIOM in hand, what would it look like? > My current intuition is that it can be made to work under the Axis2 > architecture nicely but we'll see! It will take him a few months to make > progress (he's learning stuff now). > > He will pop up on the WSIF list soon .. but needs to catch up first! > > Sanjiva. > > On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 11:10 -0500, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > > How about translating this energy into code contributions? :) Show us > > some way forward say w.r.t Axis2? or pick any other item that may > > fancy you and let us see some actual revitalization on the wsif > > mailing lists and svn and jira? > > > > thanks, > > dims > > > > On 1/12/06, Andrzej Taramina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > <sarcasm> > > > > > > WSIF is dead or dying and on it's last legs? > > > > > > </sarcasm> > > > > > > Hardly! > > > > > > BPEL engines are gaining ground and attention, not to mention market > > > share. > > > Virtually every BPEL engine out there supports WSIF as an > > > interface/invocation technology. And these are from "small/inconspicuous" > > > vendors such as IBM, Oracle and others. > > > > > > JBI and SCA? They are too complex, too heavy weight, not standardized, > > > not > > > available and compete with each other. Who knows where that space will > > > go. And I bet that > > > JBI and SCA will probably need something like WSIF as a sub-component. > > > > > > Contrast that with WSIF's market penetration, simplicity and > > > functionality. You can build > > > an amazing architectural framework to enable cheaper/faster/better > > > delivery of SOA-based > > > applications using just WSIF (I know 'cause I've done it). > > > > > > No contest. > > > > > > WSDL 2.0 is around the corner and there is a place for WSIF to integrate > > > the > > > new WODEN WSDL framework to support WSDL 2.0. Not to mention the > > > addition of > > > more providers. > > > > > > We have an opportunity to make WSIF even more attractive, compelling and > > > important. Let's not waste it! > > > > > > As for the gentleman that suggested that WSIF needs to be put out to > > > pasture? > > > He's deluded and uninformed. ;-) Need I say more? > > > > > > That being said, I would like to propose that we rename WSIF to just SIF. > > > The "Web" term is misleading and superfluous. Some rebranding and > > > repositioning of SIF would go a long way to explaining to many it's value > > > proposition. > > > > > > > > > ....Andrzej > > > > > > Chaeron Corporation > > > http://www.chaeron.com > > > > > > > > > -- > > Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/ > >
-- Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
