This is becoming one of the most often asked about and (i think) one of the
most confusing parts of using Tuscany, so how about we try to fix things up
a bit?
One problem is its just really hard to see where servlets get registered.
These days I often run with a local mod to servlet host that jus
[snip]
ant elder wrote:
On 7/26/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/26/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This is becoming one of the most often asked about and (i think)
one of
> the
> most confusing parts of using Tuscany, so how about we try to fix
things
> up
> a bi
Ant, you beat me too it;-) Having spent time yesterday trying to figure out
how URLs are handled with the web app host I feel the pain. Some comments
inline
Simon
On 7/26/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is becoming one of the most often asked about and (i think) one of
the
most c
On 7/26/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ant, you beat me too it;-) Having spent time yesterday trying to figure
out how URLs are handled with the web app host I feel the pain. Some
comments inline
Simon
On 7/26/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This is becoming one of the
On 7/26/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [snip]
> ant elder wrote:
> > On 7/26/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 7/26/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > This is becoming one of the most often asked about and (i think)
> >> one of
> >
[snip]
ant elder wrote:
I think that these URIs should be determined as part of the process of
combining wires and uris specified at different levels in the SCA
assembly. If the correct URIs are determined once as part of this
process, a binding provider should be able to just call
binding.getURI
On 7/28/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [snip]
> ant elder wrote:
> >> I think that these URIs should be determined as part of the process of
> >> combining wires and uris specified at different levels in the SCA
> >> assembly. If the correct URIs are determined once as pa
On 7/28/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 7/28/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> > ant elder wrote:
> > >> I think that these URIs should be determined as part of the process
> > of
> > >> combining wires and uris specified at different levels
Hi,
Is the definitions.xml (sec 1.8, line 2490 of Assembly spec) a good
place to define the domain uri for various schemes for an SCA Domain.
- Venkat
On 7/28/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/28/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 7/28/07, Jean-Sebastie
Thats pretty interesting. Though there's so little detail about
definitions.xml I find it hard to work out what its for, could any spec
people give a be more detail about this?
One thing it talks about is using bindingType and implementationType
elements to add new extensions, should we really be
Hi Ant,
Working with the policy framework, the definitions.xml is the file
that lists all the intents and policysets that are applicable for an
SCA Domain. The Policy Fwk specs talks quite a bit about the contents
of this file - such as things like the BindingType, ImplementationType
etc.
As for
[snip]
Simon Laws wrote:
If we're talking about a domain URI, this is typically model information
that can be hosted in a Top level Composite or Domain Composite or
Domain model object, whatever we want to call it. If I understand the
spec correctly, the cardinality is: 1 Domain -> 1 base URI p
On 7/26/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Another problem is the runtime base uri is changing for our different
> environments, for example the standalone Jetty runtime has an empty base
> uri, where as the sample webapp ones have things like /services/ or other
> samples /SCA/. That is u
I've started a page on the wiki (which everyone in the community can edit)
to capture any terminology that we use for future inclusion in the
documentation. The assorted SCA specifications define plenty of terminology
and I'm not proposing that that is repeated here. It would be useful,
however, to
Great idea Simon, sometimes I get lost with some terminologies : (, this
will help a lot : )
Adriano Crestani
On 7/28/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've started a page on the wiki (which everyone in the community can edit)
> to capture any terminology that we use for future inclus
On 7/28/07, Adriano Crestani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Great idea Simon, sometimes I get lost with some terminologies : (, this
> will help a lot : )
>
> Adriano Crestani
>
> On 7/28/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I've started a page on the wiki (which everyone in the commun
Thanks Simon.
I just think the terms should be alphabetically listed ; ). And they could
be tagged with the subproject they are related to, when it's possible.
Regards,
Adriano Crestani
On 7/28/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 7/28/07, Adriano Crestani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/28/07, Adriano Crestani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks Simon.
>
> I just think the terms should be alphabetically listed ; ). And they could
> be tagged with the subproject they are related to, when it's possible.
>
> Regards,
> Adriano Crestani
>
> On 7/28/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTEC
I haven't anything in mind right now. But as soon as I have I will add it on
the terminologies page ; )
Adriano Crestani
On 7/28/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 7/28/07, Adriano Crestani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Simon.
> >
> > I just think the terms should be alp
I edited the page as I suggested. If you don't agree with this new layout, I
can roll back the changes :)
I've added a DAS terminology. I expect I've done it correctly :D
Regards,
Adriano Crestani
On 7/28/07, Adriano Crestani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I haven't anything in mind right now. B
I added a table/index at the top to make the file easy to read and put
things in alphabetic order.
On 7/28/07, Adriano Crestani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I edited the page as I suggested. If you don't agree with this new layout,
> I
> can roll back the changes :)
>
> I've added a DAS termino
Thanks haleh, I forgot to sort the topics alphabeticaly ;)
Adriano Crestani
On 7/31/07, haleh mahbod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I added a table/index at the top to make the file easy to read and put
> things in alphabetic order.
>
>
> On 7/28/07, Adriano Crestani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
[snip]
Another problem is all our bindings work differently. So
, <
> binding.rmi/> etc all result in a
> service
> being available at a different endpoint. Also the uri attribute on
those
>
> bindings all work differently so uri="foo" for some bindings would
[snip]
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
All those sound good, and just to add one more, i think there's a bug
(unless its been fixed recently) in the standalone jetty/tomcat
runtimes so
that the port in a endpoint url is used but only for the first
endpoint. So
if you have two binding uri's ht
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
[snip]
Another problem is all our bindings work differently. So
, <
> binding.rmi/> etc all result in a
> service
> being available at a different endpoint. Also the uri attribute
on those
>
> bindings all work differently so uri
.
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message -
From: "Jean-Sebastien Delfino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 5:12 PM
Subject: Re: Rules for determining binding endpoint URIs, was: Binding
endpoints (was Fwd: Services and WSDL files
Jean-Sebastien Delf
PM
Subject: Re: Rules for determining binding endpoint URIs, was: Binding
endpoints (was Fwd: Services and WSDL files
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
[snip]
Another problem is all our bindings work differently. So
, <
> binding.rmi/> etc all result
in
.
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message -
From: "Jean-Sebastien Delfino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 12:43 PM
Subject: Rules for determining binding endpoint URIs, was: Binding endpoints
(was Fwd: Services and WSDL files
Jean-Sebastien Delfi
)
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message -
From: "Jean-Sebastien Delfino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 5:54 PM
Subject: Re: Rules for determining binding endpoint URIs, was: Binding
endpoints (was Fwd: Services and WSDL files
Comments inline.
Ra
iginal Message - From: "Jean-Sebastien Delfino"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 5:54 PM
Subject: Re: Rules for determining binding endpoint URIs, was: Binding
endpoints (was Fwd: Services and WSDL files
Comments inline.
Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
My
On 8/1/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> > Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >>
> Another problem is all our bindings work differently. So
> , <
> > binding.rmi/> etc all result in a
> > service
> > being a
See inline.
Simon
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
[snip]
Another problem is all our bindings work differently. So
, <
> binding.rmi/> etc all result in a
> service
> being available at a different endpoint. Also the uri attri
Simon Nash wrote:
I think we need this or something like it to generate URIs for callback
endpoints. The Web Service binding support for callbacks is currently
doing this. I'm not happy with forcing the user to specify an explicit
URI for an endpoint that is generated by the runtime.
Simon
ant elder wrote:
On 8/1/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
[snip]
Another problem is all our bindings work differently. So
, <
binding.rmi/> etc all result in a
service
bein
On 8/3/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ant elder wrote:
> > On 8/1/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> >>
> >>> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> >>>
> [snip]
>
>
> >> Another problem is all our bi
Simon Laws wrote:
On 8/3/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ant elder wrote:
On 8/1/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
[snip]
Another proble
On 8/6/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Simon Laws wrote:
> > On 8/3/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> ant elder wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 8/1/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> >>
On 8/6/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 8/6/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Simon Laws wrote:
> > > On 8/3/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> ant elder wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On 8/1/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino < [EMAIL
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
[snip]
Another problem is all our bindings work differently. So
, <
> binding.rmi/> etc all result in a
> service
> being available at a different endpoint. Also the uri attribute
on those
>
> bindings all work differently so uri
On 8/15/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> > Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >>
> Another problem is all our bindings work differently. So
> , <
> > binding.rmi/> etc all result in a
> > service
> > being
ant elder wrote:
On 8/15/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
[snip]
Another problem is all our bindings work differently. So
, <
binding.rmi/> etc all result in a
service
bei
On 8/15/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ant elder wrote:
> > On 8/15/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> >>
> >>> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> >>>
> [snip]
>
>
> >> Another problem is all our
On 8/15/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ant elder wrote:
> > On 8/15/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> >>
> >>> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> >>>
> [snip]
>
>
> >> Another problem is all our
On 8/15/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 8/15/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 8/15/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > ant elder wrote:
> > > > On 8/15/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Jean-
On 8/15/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 8/15/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 8/15/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 8/15/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > ant elder wrote:
> > > > > On 8/15/07, Je
On 8/15/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 8/15/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > ant elder wrote:
> > > On 8/15/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
>
On 8/15/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 8/15/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > ant elder wrote:
> > > On 8/15/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
> >
Sorry, I did not see this before doing the checkout and testing that
led to my creating TUSCANY-1501. I have rerun my test against the
latest trunk code and this is working now. I'll close TUSCANY-1501.
Simon
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
[snip]
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
All those
48 matches
Mail list logo
