Ok cool. It sounds like people are happy with this contribution. I'll
add an initial version into a new services module on trunk.
Colm.
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Willem Jiang wrote:
> +1 for we introduce a services module to house these kind of Service which
> is based on CXF and can be u
>From a user expectation standpoint, example programs should work (e.g.,
access external dependencies).
Perhaps the interopfest project should not be considered a sample (example)
project... and therefore moved out of the binary distribution and into the
src distribution only, maybe in it's own fo
Hi
What do you think of dropping a couple of modules for 2.5:
- both rt-bindings-local and rt-bindings-object seem to do the same
thing, I recall there were some interesting discussions around these two
modules awhile back :-), but today I guess it's more important which
module we actually en
+1 to removing the http binding. It is time to retire it.
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 7:07 AM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
> Hi
>
> What do you think of dropping a couple of modules for 2.5:
>
> - both rt-bindings-local and rt-bindings-object seem to do the same thing, I
> recall there were some interest
I totally agree that samples should work. If we cannot get the interop
stuff to work due to external dependencies, we should move them out of
the samples folder. If we want to keep them as is, we can put them in
a special folder with a README that clearly states that they may or
may not work.
On
On Tuesday, September 20, 2011 3:18:51 AM gliesian wrote:
> From a user expectation standpoint, example programs should work (e.g.,
> access external dependencies).
Well, from my standpoint, it really depends on what the purpose of the
example is. For example, we COULD have an example that sho
