have to say anything about it.
Dave
- Original Message -
From: "Jeremy Boynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 6:37 PM
Subject: Re: Why do we need binding.sca?
On Sep 26, 2006, at 12:01 PM, scabooz wrote:
Jeremy,
We need to bring these thr
On Sep 26, 2006, at 12:01 PM, scabooz wrote:
Jeremy,
We need to bring these threads back together. Mike's comments
further reinforce the concepts.
Agreed. If I can summarize:
* the current need for is to support rare cases of
overrides
* most assemblies will not need it at all
* _def
Jeremy,
We need to bring these threads back together. Mike's comments
further reinforce the concepts.
I'm confused. seems like a very different concept to
all other bindings. They all define protocols etc. but
does not; they allow interaction with non-SCA services,
does not; they su
A few comments inline :)
[snip]
Mike Edwards wrote:
Folks,
I'm not sure that adding more comments inline is going to help
clarity, so I'll try to make my points standalone here:
1) My view is that binding.sca was intended to imply "the binding that
the SCA runtime system will use if you sp
On Sep 26, 2006, at 6:26 AM, scabooz wrote:
- Original Message - From: "Jeremy Boynes"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Sep 25, 2006, at 6:47 PM, scabooz wrote:
Sebastien did a good job enumerating the rationale for why the
exists in the specifications. Perhaps your concern is over the
na
wrote:
Replies in line
Dave
- Original Message - From: "Jeremy Boynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 2:20 AM
Subject: Re: Why do we need binding.sca?
On Sep 25, 2006, at 6:47 PM, scabooz wrote:
Sebastien did a good job enumerating the ratio
Replies in line
Dave
- Original Message -
From: "Jeremy Boynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 2:20 AM
Subject: Re: Why do we need binding.sca?
On Sep 25, 2006, at 6:47 PM, scabooz wrote:
Sebastien did a good job enumerating the ratio
On Sep 25, 2006, at 6:47 PM, scabooz wrote:
Sebastien did a good job enumerating the rationale for why the
exists in the specifications. Perhaps your concern is over the
name of the
binding, and not the specific reason for its existence? I could be
convinced that "default" is a bad name,
th binding overrides in general. Proposals are being discussed.
Dave Booz
- Original Message -
From: "Jeremy Boynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 2:44 AM
Subject: Re: Why do we need binding.sca?
On Sep 24, 2006, at 9:32 PM, Jean-Sebastien D
On Sep 24, 2006, at 9:32 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
My understanding is that the SCA default binding is there to handle
the communication with another SCA service without requiring the
application developer to explicitly choose and configure a WS, EIS,
JMS, or whatever other bindin
bsphere maybe it is some other
specialized protocol. Or, it could be RMI which would run on both.
Jeremy will probably also throw in the question of whether
binding.sca is really needed ;-)
Why do we need binding.sca?
To connect SCA components we have wires. These wires may be remote
bsphere maybe it is some other
specialized protocol. Or, it could be RMI which would run on both.
Jeremy will probably also throw in the question of whether
binding.sca is really needed ;-)
Why do we need binding.sca?
To connect SCA components we have wires. These wires may be remote
and if so
I don't quite understand. is in the SCA 0.96 spec.
Are you suggesting that should be removed from the
SCA spec? Has this been brought up to the SCA assembly spec workgroup?
Are you saying that you are not going to implement a default
binding (with or without a element) in Tuscany/Ja
uld run on both.
Jeremy will probably also throw in the question of whether
binding.sca is really needed ;-)
Why do we need binding.sca?
To connect SCA components we have wires. These wires may be remote and
if so we need a physical connection between the machines hosting the
components a
n both.
Jeremy will probably also throw in the question of whether
binding.sca is really needed ;-)
Why do we need binding.sca?
To connect SCA components we have wires. These wires may be remote
and if so we need a physical connection between the machines hosting
the components at eit
15 matches
Mail list logo
