> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Andreas Veithen
> <andreas.veithen@gmai... <mailto:andreas.veithen@gmai...>> wrote:
> Are we actually discussing the right question? Looking at the patch
> proposed by Isuru, I have the impression that versioning is merely one
> use case, but that (in contrast to modules) the code doesn't make any
> assumption about the meaning of the hierarchy in the repository (it
> could be version number, but it could also something completely
> different). Fundamentally the change is not about versioning, but
> about giving the user the possibility to define the structure of the
> endpoint URL.
> yes. this should be the idea. it is to support hierarchical service
> folder structure to mange
> services. Versioning is only one possible use case.
> I think this is a common requirement. For an example if we take a web
> site people don't put
> all their .jsp or .html files in the root directory. They manage them
> in a some meaningful
> folder structure and even page url maps to it.
You are mistaken in the case of web site .jsp files are like .class
files. So even in Web Service we have package hierarchy.
> I can hardly think of any reason for opposing to introduce such
> feature to axis2 service deployment provided
> that it *does not break existing functionality*.
If you look at the directory structure (as I told you before)
information repeat it self. It is analogous to "Shop is closed because
it is not open".
Just because feature X is good in project Y, we should not introduce
that to Axis2.
If you or someone want to do such a feature of course they can do that,
just ad a new deployer to handle the they want, even in you case we can
do the same. Let's create a new deployer and manage anyway you like, and
then if you think it is ok, then commit the new deployer to Axis2.
However I am not ok with introducing new URL pattern, I think Isuru
already agreed to replace "/" with "-"
> I feel you have given over weight to the versioning support which is a
> use case of this. In the way to have told
> people can have versioning without any support of axis2, by just
> naming service in the way they need.
Yes. At the end of the day whether it is "/" or "-" would become a
unique name. So it is the service name.
> Comming into the other point of probable break of existing
> functionality Can you please come up with the
> set of use case scenarios for this? Then we can ask Isuru to provide
> integration test for all these scenarios. This may test the existing
> functionality as well :)
I am sorry I do not have time to comeup with scenarios when someone add
new features, specially even without going through the existing JIRA.
> I think we should not be pessimistic and think deployment engine is
> done for ever and any change will break it.
Not at all, how many changes we made, in this case my concern is not the
deployment engine it is the URL pattern.
> Please provide a set of integration tests for the scenarios mentioned.