On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 8:45 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> I've created an itest (late-reference-resolution) to show how late
> > resolution could be done using endpoint resolvers.
> >
> >
> In the itest
On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I've created an itest (late-reference-resolution) to show how late
> resolution could be done using endpoint resolvers.
>
>
In the itest BindingScaEndpointResolverImpl it says "I can cheat here
because..." could you say a lit
On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 12:48 PM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> I've updated all the code that used EndpointProviders. This includes
>> runtime-tomcat but I was unable to get this running following Ant's
On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I've updated all the code that used EndpointProviders. This includes
> runtime-tomcat but I was unable to get this running following Ant's
> instruction on this thread. It maybe that I did something wrong so I'll
> give
> it
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 4:37 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 2:56 PM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > ...snip
>> >
>> > >
>> > > The two sets of SPIs could co-exist fo
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 2:56 PM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > ...snip
> >
> > >
> > > The two sets of SPIs could co-exist for a while with BindingProviders
> > > working with bindings and ServiceProviders (I j
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> ...snip
>
> >
> > The two sets of SPIs could co-exist for a while with BindingProviders
> > working with bindings and ServiceProviders (I just made up that name)
> with
> > service endpoints.
> > --
> > Jean-Sebastien
>
>
> A
More comments in line...
Simon
> Created a separate factory for it (separate as I though the model may need
>> to be pluggable as some point)
>>
>
> Would it be possible to just add the create method the AssemblyFactory?
Yep, we could do that. Am going to hold back for a little while on thi
Please see my comments below.
Thanks,
Raymond
--
From: "Simon Laws" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 1:26 AM
To:
Subject: Endpoints was: Re: [BRAINSTORM] Flexibility in distributed
operation and extension implementations - was: Re:
This problem has now been fixed in SVN revision r657009
Thanks,
Mark
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Combellack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 16 May 2008 11:26
> To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Endpoints was: Re: [BRAINSTORM] Flexibility in distribu
Hi,
I've just tried building the latest trunk of Tuscany and I'm getting a
compile failure in the new endpoint module. The error I am getting is:
[INFO]
[INFO] Error for project: Apache Tuscany SCA Default Endpoint Im
11 matches
Mail list logo