n't end up using
different header files with different dlls at the back.
Regards
Jaspreet
-Original Message-
From: BLIS Webmaster (Patrick Houbaux)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 5:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: interface versioning
Yes this are
>Does anyone have great thoughts on interface versioning?
I'd love to hear the answer for this, or at least some more
discussion. It's a hard problem. I have some practical experience with
this, but no great answers.
I am engineer at Google; I work on our SOAP interface, the Google Web
APIs. When
files with different dlls at the back.
Regards
Jaspreet
> -Original Message-
> From: BLIS Webmaster (Patrick Houbaux)
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 5:21 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: interface versioning
>
>
> Y
Yes this are the conclusions I made as well :)
One strategy I was thinking of is to mention something like "Deprecated (wont be available
anymore from 2005.1.1" in the message returned by the getVersion() for the version I don't
want to maintain anymore on the server side.
So that client applicat
Looks like publishing one WSDL file for each interface version
and having a getVersion() method is a reasonable solution.
pros - clients can query versions and talk to the one they
are familiar with.
cons - server app needs to support all interfaces.
Ta,
Stuart.
Stuart Barlow wrote:
Thanks
Thanks Patrick,
I tried using the search from the AXIS mailing list page this
morning and got hits from all mailing lists.
Ill read this link and get back.
BLIS Webmaster (Patrick Houbaux) wrote:
I remember having some discussions in the mailing list about that.
Browse the following thread:
http:
I remember having some discussions in the mailing list about that.
Browse the following thread:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=axis-user&m=106737614722205&w=2
Patrick.
Stuart Barlow wrote:
Does anyone have great thoughts on interface versioning?
Is it wise to think about keeping an interface g
