>
> As I mentioned earlier this is about how people think about it. So I
> think one way and
> you think in another way :).
> Therefore if more people think that the current way is good enough
> lets keep it in that way. If more
> people want a change then do it in that way. Since this is a commun
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Deepal jayasinghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Amila ,
> >
> > IMO we need to use different extensions for different type of
> > services. transport should have something like
> > http.tar. I think that is why we use .aar for service archives .mar
> > for modules
Hi Amila ,
>
> IMO we need to use different extensions for different type of
> services. transport should have something like
> http.tar. I think that is why we use .aar for service archives .mar
> for modules etc.
Yes I agree. But if we can have multiple deployer for same extension
then why not do
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 7:09 PM, Deepal jayasinghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > > In my point of view always deployer should only map to an
> extension.
> > -1 , if you think the POJO deployer it can handle both .class
> > files and
> > .jar files , so are you saying thats a
>
> > In my point of view always deployer should only map to an extension.
> -1 , if you think the POJO deployer it can handle both .class
> files and
> .jar files , so are you saying thats a problem. If we have the
> flexibility and if we doing that for a long time without an
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 6:55 PM, Deepal jayasinghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > we can do some thing like that Jboss does. In Jboss if you want to
> > deploy a web application either it should be put as .war file or under
> > a directory of which name ends with .war .
> >
> > i.e in axis2 point
Deepal jayasinghe wrote:
Nope I did not say I am against the improvement what I told was we
should not remove some working features , specially POJO deployer scenario.
+1.
Yes of course and I am always +1 to make things more flexible , but
without breaking what we have now.
That's what ve
> Hey,
>
> I've been working on this problem and ran into some issues and would
> like to get your comments before committing a fix. The
> RepositoryListener.findServicesInDirectory() scans the "services"
> directory and tries to deploy service modules (.jar or .aar files)
> using ServiceDeployer.
> Deepal, proposing an improvement is not saying some idea that was
> implemented some time ago was bad. That was the best we could do given
> the information we had then, but this is about improving things going
> forward.
>
Nope I did not say I am against the improvement what I told was we
shoul
Amila Suriarachchi wrote:
we can do some thing like that Jboss does. In Jboss if you want to
deploy a web application either it should be put as .war file or under a
directory of which name ends with .war .
i.e in axis2 point of view either it should be bar.aar file or bar.aar
directory.
Deepal, proposing an improvement is not saying some idea that was
implemented some time ago was bad. That was the best we could do given the
information we had then, but this is about improving things going forward.
There's no need to be defensive about decisions we made many years ago ..
no d
> we can do some thing like that Jboss does. In Jboss if you want to
> deploy a web application either it should be put as .war file or under
> a directory of which name ends with .war .
>
> i.e in axis2 point of view either it should be bar.aar file or bar.aar
> directory.
>
> In my point of view
> Hi Jarek,
>
> Hmmm .. good question. I've actually been thinking for a while that
> the idea of associating a folder to a specific extension was a mistake.
Nope we are not , you can have all the extensions you want in a single
folder too. for example inside the POJO directory you can have both
.
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 8:53 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Hi Jarek,
>
> Hmmm .. good question. I've actually been thinking for a while that the
> idea of associating a folder to a specific extension was a mistake. To me
> that's very "static" thinking and its much more conven
Hi Jarek,
Hmmm .. good question. I've actually been thinking for a while that the
idea of associating a folder to a specific extension was a mistake. To me
that's very "static" thinking and its much more convenient to allow people
to use whatever folder hierarchy they want and just put their s
Hey,
I've been working on this problem and ran into some issues and would
like to get your comments before committing a fix. The
RepositoryListener.findServicesInDirectory() scans the "services"
directory and tries to deploy service modules (.jar or .aar files)
using ServiceDeployer. But also, whe
Glen Daniels wrote:
Hi Jarek, Deepal:
Jarek Gawor wrote:
Deepal,
I think you misunderstood. The code assumes there is one deploeyer per
extension. See DeploymentEngine.getDeployerForExtension(). That should
either be:
Deployer getDeployerForExtension(String directory, String extension)
or
L
Hi Jarek, Deepal:
Jarek Gawor wrote:
Deepal,
I think you misunderstood. The code assumes there is one deploeyer per
extension. See DeploymentEngine.getDeployerForExtension(). That should
either be:
Deployer getDeployerForExtension(String directory, String extension)
or
List getDeployerForExt
Deepal,
I think you misunderstood. The code assumes there is one deploeyer per
extension. See DeploymentEngine.getDeployerForExtension(). That should
either be:
Deployer getDeployerForExtension(String directory, String extension)
or
List getDeployerForExtension(String extension)
Jarek
On Tue,
Done.
Thank you!
Deepal
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone have comments on
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-4101? In general, I would
> like to know if we should allow for multiple deployers to be
> registered for the same file extension (for any directory). Right now,
> only one is assumed and t
Hi,
Does anyone have comments on
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-4101? In general, I would
like to know if we should allow for multiple deployers to be
registered for the same file extension (for any directory). Right now,
only one is assumed and that causes problems.
Thanks,
Jarek
-
21 matches
Mail list logo
