Re: Pluggable WSIFServiceFactories

Hi,

Introduction of custom service factories was taken out for efficiency 
reasons at one point, but I support it as being a good thing, since I 
think the use far outweighs the reduction in performance. Why don't you 
submit the patch so the committers can vote on it? Hopefully it will pass 
that vote and if so I'll commit it to the codebase.

Thanks,
Nirmal.




Paul Russell <[email protected]>
01/26/2004 06:45 PM
Please respond to wsif-dev
 
        To:     [email protected]
        cc: 
        Subject:        Pluggable WSIFServiceFactories


Guys,

I've been doing some work recently which involves putting an 
interceptor stack in the path of web service invocation. I did this by 
writing a custom implementation of the WSIFServiceFactory which routes 
the requests via the interceptor stack before invoking the 'real' 
service implementation via whatever provider was selected.

When I tried to run this, I discovered that the code to instantiate a 
non-standard  WSIFServiceFactory has been stripped out. I've made 
changes to my local copy of the codebase to re-introduce this feature. 
Is this something which has been long decided is a  'bad thing'? At the 
moment, the documentation doesn't seem to make it clear that this 
doesn't work, hence me spending a few hours writing something which 
couldn't work under the default implementation.

It seems to me that there are two options here:

1) Decide that this feature shouldn't be there. Modify the 
documentation to strip out any mention of this being a possibility.
2) Decide that this feature is useful (of which the fact that I'm using 
it may be some evidence). Modify the code-base to support the feature 
again.

I'm more than happy to provide the appropriate patch if option two is 
the way to go...

Thoughts?


Paul
-- 
Paul Russell
[email protected]