+1 Paul. I'm also completely -1 to separating C from the Java side.
Sanjiva.
Paul Fremantle wrote:
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]
--
Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D.
Founder & Director; Lanka Software Foundation; http://www.opensource.lk/
Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/
Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/
Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
