On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 12:43 AM, Chamikara Jayalath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We actually considered this idea in the early phases of Sandesha2. After > some discussions we thought of going for a Axis2 based one so that we can > use all the features that are readily available with Axis2. These included > the context hierarchy, pause/resume functionality, Messages Receivers, AXIOM > etc. I agree with Chamikara. As I have mention earlier Mercury has two parts. The real implementation of Mercury/Sandesha2 or any RM implementation depends lot about Axis2 architecture and all the things Chamikara has mentioned. Therefore writting a Common implementation will be a very complex one. For an example it always depends on the MessageContext and its properties. However As I showed earlier, The state machine model (given in simulator) does not depends on the Axis2. So someone can implement that on top of CXF. thanks, Amila. > > > Chamikara > > > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> >> Just FYI: I'm also quite interested in the idea of a "generic" RM engine >> that could be plugged in to various stacks/providers. Things like WSS4J >> and Neethi have been a big help to CXF (and probably others) specifically >> because they were "generic" enough to be used outside of Axis. In the >> case of WSS4J, it has actually helped the WSS4J community as developers >> working on CXF stuff have started contributing to WSS4J as well. Fred >> Dushin is now a committer on WSS4J specifically due to work integrating it >> with CXF. Sandesha could potentially benefit similarly if it can become >> generic enough to not be considered "just a RM plugin to Axis 2". >> Basically, this could be an opportunity to expand the Sandesha community, >> and that's a good thing. >> >> Dan >> >> >> >> >> pzfreo wrote: >> > >> > David >> > >> > I want to make it clear that I'm *strongly* hoping that there will be >> > greater involvement than just one person. >> > >> > I also *really* like the idea of building an RM implementation that >> > has a core model that is not dependent around a specific stack (Axis2, >> > CXF). I have always believed that there is a space for a really stable >> > and performant WSRM messaging engine and the Sandesha model - where >> > the stack is in control and the messaging engine is "just" a set of >> > handlers just doesn't feel to me like it can compete with a pure >> > messaging option like ActiveMQ or QPid. So in many ways, starting from >> > WSRM and treating the problem as "how to build a messaging engine that >> > also happens to be able to fit into Axis2" would be very interesting >> > to me. >> > >> > I am actually not against having an incubator proposal. The only >> > challenge with the Incubator is that: >> > 1) the incubator is fundamentally designed to bootstrap new >> > communities. If there is an existing community already then it doesn't >> > necessarily work. I would rather have this discussion on sandesha-dev >> > than have to somehow encourage everyone from sandesha-dev to start >> > paying attention to a new list. >> > 2) The incubator is also about how to get non-Apache members involved. >> > So far everyone interested in this is already a committer in Apache. >> > So in fact, labs.apache.org is more appropriate. >> > 3) The incubator is a hassle. Its a hassle for good reasons and I >> > strongly support it. But if you don't need that hassle, then you >> > shouldn't take it! >> > >> > How would a design that works across both CXF and Axis2 work? Its an >> > intriguing idea. >> > >> > Paul >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:02 PM, David Illsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 1:24 PM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> Glen. I didn't think there was any consensus from the previous >> >>> discussion (does the word dissensus exist?) :) >> >>> >> >>> I am actually pretty happy to do either, I think each approach has +s >> >>> and -s. >> >>> >> >>> On the side of starting from the Mercury codebase, Amila has got it to >> >>> a point where it satisfies the 1.0 spec, including Replay. >> >>> On the other hand, Mercury doesn't yet implement 1.1 or >> >>> MakeConnection, and also it doesn't support transactions yet, so there >> >>> are some fairly large aspects still to be coded. And starting afresh >> >>> might well get more involvement from the wider community which I think >> >>> has been the main pushback on this proposal so far. >> >> >> >> Clearly new code developed here will have far fewer legal issues (e.g. >> >> the submitted Mercury has a hard LGPL dependency which would need >> >> ironed out), and would hopefully have a cleaner state machine model - >> >> the Mercury one seems to have compromised for reasons which are pretty >> >> opaque. >> >> >> >>> I guess one open question is - who is willing to put in the effort to >> >>> work on this?! If it's just Amila, then starting afresh won't be much >> >>> benefit, because he will be happier to keep working from the code he >> >>> has already built. >> >> >> >> I'd certainly be interested in being involved in a new codebase, but >> >> the amount of time I'd have to devote to it would be limited. If it's >> >> just Amila, then my "Apache Way Sense" tingles to suggest that this >> >> isn't really going anywhere in Apache, and probably shouldn't. >> >> >> >> These 2 questions (legal and community) are some of the reasons why >> >> the Incubator exists, and sort of points me back in that direction. >> >> >> >> David >> >> >> >> P.S. In writing this, it occurred to me that trying to write a common >> >> WS-RM kernel that could be used with CXF and Axis2 might be a good >> >> target, and that too, might point to the Incubator to help build a >> >> broader community (not a fully formed thought though) >> >> >> >> P.P.S. I really like "dissensus" >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Paul Fremantle >> > Co-Founder and CTO, WSO2 >> > Apache Synapse PMC Chair >> > OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair >> > >> > blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> > "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> > >> > >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/-DISCUSS--Mercury-Proposal-tp17790601p17828246.html >> Sent from the Apache Sandesha mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > -- Amila Suriarachchi, WSO2 Inc.
