Jochen Its not just about interop - its about a shared design and a shared community.
1) I believe that the Axis2/C team has worked very hard to share code, designs and work closely with the rest of the team. I'm not sure that the Java team has worked so closely, but I guess that is because they tended to build the code ahead of the C team. However, I think you need to take strong account of the views of the C team in this process. 2) There is a benefit to keeping these together. While we have - on the whole - had benefit of splitting Synapse out, it has also made some aspects a little trickier (e.g. the transport discussions). Now, Synapse has a different aim than Axis2, but I don't believe thats true for Axis2/C and Axis2/Java. 3) There are some interesting things we can do *together* with Axis2/C and Java. For example, Axis2/C is around 6 times faster at handling WS-Security than Axis2/Java. We could do a JNI-based high-performance WS-Security transport for Java using the C code. I don't want to make these kinds of things harder. 4) Axis2 has a unique position in having a Java AND C library and the same architecture. This is a serious advantage over other libraries. We need to strengthen not weaken this bond. Paul On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 8:37 AM, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 9:21 AM, Samisa Abeysinghe > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> -1. They share the same architecture. They do the same this, only the >> implementation is different. >> And they are supposed to work with each other, interop in other words, so >> they have lot in common. > > Interoperability is not an argument. Axis is trying hard to be > interoperable with others as well. About > the architecture: Might be, but that doesn't mean, that it is a single > community in practice. > > To convince me, you should give me *more* examples like the following, > where work actually shared: > > >> It is a fact that, you can interop being disjoint projects. However, we even >> use the WSDL2Code tool to generate code. If Axis2/Java becomes a separate >> TLP and can an Axis2/C comittor do changed to that tool? > > What's the problem? I can't see anyone from preventing an Axis2/C > committer being a > Axis2/Java committer as well, if he or she is interested in it? My > expectation would be, > though, that it is a minority only, who wants it. > > > Jochen > > -- > I have always wished for my computer to be as easy to use as my > telephone; my wish has come true because I can no longer figure out > how to use my telephone. > > -- (Bjarne Stroustrup, > http://www.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#really-say-that > My guess: Nokia E50) > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Paul Fremantle Co-Founder and CTO, WSO2 Apache Synapse PMC Chair OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
