OK, per Guillaume's suggestion perhaps we start anew basing everything on 0.90 sca.
So, what are peoples thoughts towards the design of the translation layer? Should we leverage Tuscany's parsing capabilities to read in the SCA contribution? Then, from the parsed structure generate the service-unit JBI artifacts? Each type of implementation(e.g. implementation.bpel) will generate different artifacts. So, this will need to be pluggable / extensible. Perhaps we start with Jean-Sebastien's example, then implement the translation layer first? (independent of both tuscany and servicemix) What do people think? -brian On 6/27/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip] Guillaume Nodet wrote: > Jean-Sebastien said that the apis are quite stable now, so I guess > the best way would be upgrade to the latest released version. > Maybe Jean-Sebastien can provide more inforamtions here. > > Imo, the tuscany code has changed so much so that it may be > better to try uinderstanding how the SE works and maybe start > a new one (at least for the tuscany binding classes). > > As for the sources, I guess we should be able to find > a svn revision that would match the date somehow: > March the 17th 2006. > I'd recommend to use the Tuscany SCA 0.90 release and SDO 1.0 beta 1 levels... March 17th 2006 is more than a year ago :) -- Jean-Sebastien
-- Brian ONeill Source Equity (http://www.sourceequity.com) jBIZint (http://www.jbizint.org) Technical Architect, Gestalt LLC (http://www.gestalt-llc.com) mobile:215.588.6024
