Nice one Matthew. I tried it on Fedora Core 6 and Windows XP SP2. It
gets a clean bill of health on linux and all is OK on Windows apart
from the two phpt problems I have problems with but you don't.
SCA php004.phpt. I'll just keep an eye on this one as the same code
works in the unit tests
SDO
Hi there,
Sorry for the (slightly) off topic posting. I'm wondering if anyone has
had any success consuming a SCA web service in Visual Studio (VB or C#)?
I know very, very little about VB, C#, and Visual Studio. But, I want
to make sure that end users of my service can actually consume it in
There's no stopping us now :-). I just packaged up 1.2.1 with a few
bug fixes:
The release notes for 1.2.1 are:
* Fix for spaces in service description URLs (pecl defect #11006).
* Experimental support for service names following the PEAR coding
standard
* Experimental support for a manual servic
I've been looking into this issue further. The condition(s) to
determine if a callable method parameter is nillable more tricky than
I initially thought. I was hoping that a simple
ReflectionParameter::allowsNull() call would be all that is
necessary. However, and this makes perfect sense, all
Thank you so much for your work, it help a lot .
I'll continue to try to handle this issue.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"phpsoa" group.
To post to this group, send email to phpsoa@googlegroups.co
That makes sense. Lets move it out of head and into a branch.
On 11 May, 15:25, "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/11/07, Graham Charters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi Simon, yes I did. I had been assured that this would be ok because
> > the 'development in a branch' appr
No, I'm using HEAD, but 004 fails for me too, and with the same error.
On 11 May, 15:02, "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Graham
>
> Thanks for the suggestion. I did try turning my firewall of but still got
> the same effect. Does php004 pass for you?
>
> Simon
--~--~-~--~---
On 5/11/07, Graham Charters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Simon, yes I did. I had been assured that this would be ok because
> the 'development in a branch' approach is really only necessary for
> native extension code (because pecl4win always pulls this from HEAD).
> Let me know if you thin
>
> Graham
Thanks for the suggestion. I did try turning my firewall of but still got
the same effect. Does php004 pass for you?
Simon
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"phpsoa" group.
To post to this
+1
I also agree with this. The wsdl generation should exclude all
methods beginning with '__'.
On 11 May, 12:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Edit report athttp://pecl.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=10925&edit=1
>
> ID: 10925
> Updated by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -Summary: Meg
Hi Simon, yes I did. I had been assured that this would be ok because
the 'development in a branch' approach is really only necessary for
native extension code (because pecl4win always pulls this from HEAD).
Let me know if you think the binding should go elsewhere.
On 11 May, 14:48, [EMAIL PROTE
Hi Simon,
I've seen this kind of thing happen due to firewall problems. When
you run the tests from the commandline the firewall might block
php.exe, but when you run samples in the browser it lets apache.exe
through. Might be a red herring.
On 11 May, 13:06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> php004.
Nice Graham. Don't have any feedback yet but a quick question. Did you
mean to check it into HEAD rather than the branch?
Simon
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"phpsoa" group.
To post to this group,
I've just checked the ebaysoap binding into HEAD. I've also checked
in a couple of samples into the examples directory. There's a readme
in the examples directory that briefly describes how to get started.
The binding's pretty easy to use, removing the need for the coder to
work with soap heade
On May 11, 12:51 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> doh - i always forget about the mem leak message
I wish I could do that too :-)
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"phpsoa" group.
To post to this gr
On May 11, 1:06 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> php004.phpt seems to be failing trying to resolve
>
> http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/"; />
>
> Which is part of soap/soap/2003-02-11.xsd
>
That import has no schemaLocation attribute, which concerns me. Also,
remember that I removed the wsdl/soap
php004.phpt seems to be failing trying to resolve
http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/"; />
Which is part of soap/soap/2003-02-11.xsd
However all the examples work OK so I can only guess this is being
resolved successfully in other
scenarios. Is anyone else who has CURLEW checked out also seeing
ph
Edit report at http://pecl.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=10925&edit=1
ID: 10925
Updated by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Summary: Megic Methods in Service Descriptions
Reported By: michael dot caplan at henryschein dot com
Status: Open
Id: 10925
Typ
snip
> > [2] 10049
>
> > 1[Fri May 11 11:49:23 2007] Script:
> > 'C:\simon\Projects\Tuscany\php\branch-build\pecl\sdo\tests\SDO\phpt\bug10049.php'
>
> Congratulations, you've found a memory leak. You are running in debug
> mode. Strange though, because I also run in debug mode and I don't see
>
On May 11, 11:58 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm running with the code from CURLEW. Which is >=1.2.0. I'm not clear
> from your comments whether these tests should or shouldn't be
> running. But they are running and failing in my case [3] and [4].
They should be running if the SDO version nu
Thanks for doing that Mike
Simon
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"phpsoa" group.
To post to this group, send email to phpsoa@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL P
Hi Simon,
Thanks for the feedback. I logged this as feature request #11012 in
PECL.
Best,
Mike
> -Original Message-
> From: phpsoa@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: May 11, 2007 6:26 AM
> To: phpsoa
> Subject: [phpsoa] Re: .NET integr
Hi
I've just been trying the examples in the CURLEW branch this morning
in preparation for doing a referesh of the release as we have found a
few problems with 1.2.0. This looks like one of them. All the examples
from examples/sca/index.html work for me now after Matthew applied
some changed yest
Hi Simon,
I've some problems. i installed release 1.2.0, and some of my code
from last week is no longer working ( which was working last Tuesday,
i showed you). Then i also tried the new examples and got the same
error:
PHP Fatal error: Uncaught SCA_RuntimeException: SDO_Exception in
setWSDLTy
Comments in line
On 11 May, 10:49, cem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On May 11, 10:29 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I am getting the following 4 phpt test failure when I run the tests on
> > the code in CURLEW (I also see them in the 1.2.0 released code so It's
> > not specific to CURLEW).
>
On May 11, 10:29 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am getting the following 4 phpt test failure when I run the tests on
> the code in CURLEW (I also see them in the 1.2.0 released code so It's
> not specific to CURLEW).
>
> SCA 004
> SDO bug 10049
> SDO bug 10842
> SDO bug 8694
>
> Can someone te
Sorry I'm a bit late to the party here. Good idea. I've also added a
breaking news to the front page of the web site to point out which
branch we are currently developing on. We can added new items to
update this as we move between releases and create new branches.
Simon
--~--~-~--~-
I am getting the following 4 phpt test failure when I run the tests on
the code in CURLEW (I also see them in the 1.2.0 released code so It's
not specific to CURLEW).
SCA 004
SDO bug 10049
SDO bug 10842
SDO bug 8694
Can someone tell me if we are exepcting these to fail?
Simon
--~--~-~
Hi Mike
It seems that this is still the case. I didn't get a good answer to
whether we can turn the behaviour off so I'll go and take a look at
the code and see if we can request the omission of the type
annotations. It may be that they specified this bhaviour in the SDO
spec but it's probably ea
29 matches
Mail list logo
