I do not think we want to promote two different programming models for
webservices on GF - do we want to ?
Vijay
Satish Viswanatham wrote:
>
> Web Services Management code did not display non-109 web services in
> the console, primarily because the testing and monitoring facilities
> were not available for non-109 web services.
>
> If this changes - we can display the non-109 services in the console.
>
> thanks
> Satish
>
> Ed Mooney wrote On 10/16/06 14:42,:
>
>> Displaying non-109 web services would be fulfilling an expectation,
>> not promoting them, IMO. If it's not possible to test non-109 web
>> services, then I agree that displaying them is of diminished use.
>>
>> -- Ed
>>
>> Ludovic Champenois wrote:
>>
>>> Vijay Ramachandran wrote:
>>>
>>>> As of now, the ws-mgmt subsystem recognizes the presence/absence of
>>>> webservices by looking for the presence/absence of 109 specific
>>>> artifacts. Hence this "restriction".
>>>>
>>>> Satish - any comments on displaying non-109 based services in the
>>>> admin console ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Why would we want to promote * non Java EE standard* WSs? I don't
>>> get it.
>>> I would really prefer we spend the time to enhance our existing 109
>>> WS tester to accept complex parameters :-)
>>> My 2 cents.
>>> Ludo
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Vijay
>>>>
>> [ ... ]
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>