ode-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rich Taylor" <bhamtay...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Compile error on <wsdl:import>
Date Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:34:45 GMT
I appreciate the insight/history.  You both pointed out more cons than came
to mind for me.   For our situation, all of these cons do definitely
outweigh the pros.  We're leaning towards the gathering of these files
before deployment to Ode, but wanted to explore pulling them down at
runtime.  Sounds like that option has already been explored in depth.  The
correct path is even clearer now.  Thank you, Rich

On 7/25/07, Matthieu Riou <matthieu.riou@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Rich,
> We had some support for it at some point in time but it was partial, which
> is a way to say mostly broken. There are many hidden hurdles when
> implementing this on non trivial cases (which is actually most of the
> cases
> we have to support). Here are a few examples:
> * So you start getting the remote file but it imports other files, what do
> you do with them? You obviously have to download them as well so you start
> with a recursive problem.
> * What do you do with everything you download? Keep them in memory and
> download every time? Not so nice (especially when one of the servers you
> download from isn't reliable). You save them locally? Now you have a URL
> rewriting problem as well as all import locations have to be changed and
> you
> have a repository of documents to maintain.
> * Alternatively when downloading you can start in-lining things to get a
> single file locally, that solve the import location rewriting problem but
> in-lining itself is not really trivial either.
> * What do you do when somewhere along the way of imports is either not
> there
> or the server is down? HTTP is not a very reliable protocol. You have no
> choice but to fail the whole thing, which is not always the smartest thing
> to do. And the files you saved along the way? Keep them? Damp them?
> And these are just on top of my head, I'm sure you can find many others.
> Implementing this, you end up with a pretty big, hard to test, piece of
> code. So when we refactored our deployment model we decided to save
> ourselves some time and pain and not support it.
> But that doesn't mean we're against it or anything. It's just that it
> would
> have required far more effort than what we were ready to give for this
> feature, so it's more on the "hasn't been done yet" side. If somebody is
> very interested in it and is ready to give it a shot (including tests),
> we'd
> welcome this contribution in ODE with open arms :-)
> Cheers,
> Matthieu
> On 7/25/07, Rich Taylor <bhamtaylor@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Alex and Gang, do you know if this was an intentional design decision
> > to
> > not support remote wsdl/xsd/etc. references or is it something that
> simply
> > hasn't been done yet?  I can see the pros and cons of each, just trying
> to
> > understand why "it is how it is".  Thanks! Rich
> >
> > On 7/2/07, Alex Boisvert <boisvert@intalio.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 7/2/07, RichTaylor <bhamtaylor@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Am I reading this correctly that Ode does not currently support the
> > > > importing
> > > > of remote WSDL files (and XSD, etc.)?  The WSDL files must be
> > available
> > > > and
> > > > referenced on the local disk?
> > >
> > >
> > > Correct.
> > >
> > > alex
> > >
> >

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message