gmane.text.xml.distributed archive

873 archived articles, newest first (page 6 of 9). Latest articles →

[ANN] [Axis2] Axis2 0.94 Released
Thu, 12 Jan 2006 03:13:22 +0000
Eran Chinthaka <[email protected]> • #2785
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire
Thu, 12 Jan 2006 01:32:53 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2784
Re: The deep difference between request/response and fire-and-forget
Thu, 12 Jan 2006 01:30:50 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2783
Action item - Part 2: SOAP request-response, response, request-optional-response ...
Thu, 12 Jan 2006 01:22:55 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2782
Re: The deep difference between request/response and fire-and-forget
Thu, 12 Jan 2006 01:16:25 -0500 (EST)
Rich Salz <[email protected]> • #2781
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire
Thu, 12 Jan 2006 00:40:52 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2780
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire
Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:10:36 -0500
Christopher B Ferris <[email protected]> • #2779
Re: Preliminary work on making envelope optional
Wed, 11 Jan 2006 23:10:38 -0500
Christopher B Ferris <[email protected]> • #2778
The deep difference between request/response and fire-and-forget
Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:15:33 -0500
[email protected] • #2777
Re: Rewrite of SOAP 1.2 Adjuncts
Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:19:03 -0500
[email protected] • #2776
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire (clarification)
Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:02:01 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2775
Re: Optional SOAP response; the transfer binding view
Wed, 11 Jan 2006 10:52:42 -0800
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2774
Re: Preliminary work on making envelope optional
Wed, 11 Jan 2006 10:29:15 -0800
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2773
Re: Optional SOAP response; the transfer binding view
Wed, 11 Jan 2006 13:22:59 -0500
[email protected] • #2772
Re: Optional SOAP response; the transfer binding view
Wed, 11 Jan 2006 09:51:14 -0800
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2771
Re: Optional SOAP response; the transfer binding view
Wed, 11 Jan 2006 10:57:25 -0500
[email protected] • #2770
RE: Rewrite of SOAP 1.2 Adjuncts
Tue, 10 Jan 2006 17:23:39 -0800
"David Orchard" <[email protected]> • #2769
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire (clarification)
Tue, 10 Jan 2006 17:20:31 -0800
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2768
Optional SOAP response; the transfer binding view
Tue, 10 Jan 2006 17:18:11 -0800
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2767
Re: Preliminary work on making envelope optional
Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:40:32 -0500
[email protected] • #2766
Re: SOAP/XMPP
Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:48:31 -0500
[email protected] • #2765
Re: SOAP/XMPP
Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:25:20 -0500 (EST)
Rich Salz <[email protected]> • #2764
Re: SOAP/XMPP
Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:23:14 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2763
Re: SOAP/XMPP
Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:22:32 -0500 (EST)
Rich Salz <[email protected]> • #2762
SOAP/XMPP
Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:01:33 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2761
Re: Rewrite of SOAP 1.2 Adjuncts
Tue, 10 Jan 2006 14:59:51 -0500 (EST)
Rich Salz <[email protected]> • #2760
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire (clarification)
Tue, 10 Jan 2006 13:48:38 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2759
Re: Rewrite of SOAP 1.2 Adjuncts
Tue, 10 Jan 2006 13:08:53 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2758
Re: Rewrite of SOAP 1.2 Adjuncts
Tue, 10 Jan 2006 12:45:39 -0500 (EST)
Rich Salz <[email protected]> • #2757
Re: Thought of the day:
Tue, 10 Jan 2006 11:45:01 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2756
Re: Thought of the day:
Mon, 9 Jan 2006 23:20:58 -0800
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2755
Re: The role of transfer protocols
Mon, 9 Jan 2006 23:15:15 -0800
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2754
Preliminary work on making envelope optional
Mon, 9 Jan 2006 20:03:54 -0500
[email protected] • #2753
RE: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Mon, 9 Jan 2006 14:44:19 -0800
"David Orchard" <[email protected]> • #2752
RE: Rewrite of SOAP 1.2 Adjuncts
Mon, 9 Jan 2006 14:35:43 -0800
"David Orchard" <[email protected]> • #2751
Re: The role of transfer protocols
Mon, 9 Jan 2006 09:57:51 -0500
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2750
Re: Rewrite of SOAP 1.2 Adjuncts
Mon, 9 Jan 2006 15:37:22 +0100 (MET)
Yves Lafon <[email protected]> • #2749
Re: The role of transfer protocols
Mon, 9 Jan 2006 15:28:31 +0100 (MET)
Yves Lafon <[email protected]> • #2748
Re: The role of transfer protocols
Mon, 9 Jan 2006 01:42:10 -0500
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2747
Re: The role of transfer protocols
Mon, 09 Jan 2006 00:47:52 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2746
Re: Rewrite of SOAP 1.2 Adjuncts
Sun, 08 Jan 2006 23:40:30 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2745
Re: The role of transfer protocols
Fri, 6 Jan 2006 22:51:31 -0500
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2744
Re: Rewrite of SOAP 1.2 Adjuncts
Fri, 06 Jan 2006 16:06:49 -0500
Rich Salz <[email protected]> • #2743
Re: Rewrite of SOAP 1.2 Adjuncts
Fri, 06 Jan 2006 15:28:16 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2742
Re: The role of transfer protocols
Fri, 06 Jan 2006 11:16:54 -0700
Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> • #2741
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire
Fri, 06 Jan 2006 13:14:15 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2740
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire
Fri, 6 Jan 2006 13:03:28 -0500
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2739
Re: The role of transfer protocols
Fri, 06 Jan 2006 12:47:34 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2738
The role of transfer protocols
Fri, 6 Jan 2006 10:32:37 -0500
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2737
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire
Thu, 05 Jan 2006 13:45:46 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2736
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire
Thu, 05 Jan 2006 13:10:30 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2735
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire
Thu, 5 Jan 2006 12:12:38 -0500
[email protected] • #2734
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire
Thu, 5 Jan 2006 12:02:01 -0500
[email protected] • #2733
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire
Thu, 05 Jan 2006 11:01:49 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2732
Re: Rewrite of SOAP 1.2 Adjuncts
Thu, 05 Jan 2006 10:30:21 -0500
Marc Hadley <[email protected]> • #2731
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire
Thu, 5 Jan 2006 09:13:24 -0500
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2730
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire
Thu, 05 Jan 2006 01:49:00 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2729
Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire
Wed, 4 Jan 2006 21:03:27 -0500
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2728
Rewrite of SOAP 1.2 Adjuncts
Wed, 4 Jan 2006 15:56:26 -0800
"David Orchard" <[email protected]> • #2727
Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire
Wed, 04 Jan 2006 17:24:37 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2726
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Wed, 4 Jan 2006 11:49:29 -0500
[email protected] • #2725
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Wed, 04 Jan 2006 11:34:53 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2724
Re: What it means to "get rid of MEPs"
Wed, 04 Jan 2006 17:33:01 +0100
HervĂ© Ruellan <[email protected]> • #2723
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Wed, 04 Jan 2006 09:54:26 -0500
Marc Hadley <[email protected]> • #2722
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Wed, 4 Jan 2006 08:31:43 -0500
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2721
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Tue, 03 Jan 2006 22:47:13 -0800
Anish Karmarkar <[email protected]> • #2720
Re: What it means to "get rid of MEPs"
Tue, 27 Dec 2005 11:08:27 -0500
Rich Salz <[email protected]> • #2719
Re: What it means to "get rid of MEPs"
Fri, 23 Dec 2005 19:47:48 -0500
Francisco Curbera <[email protected]> • #2718
Re: What it means to "get rid of MEPs"
Fri, 23 Dec 2005 18:19:16 -0500
[email protected] • #2717
Re: What it means to "get rid of MEPs"
Fri, 23 Dec 2005 13:32:27 -0500
Rich Salz <[email protected]> • #2716
Re: Jabber Binding Supports Request/Response - existence proof of shared MEPs
Thu, 22 Dec 2005 15:53:03 -0500
[email protected] • #2715
Re: Jabber Binding Supports Request/Response - existence proof of shared MEPs
Thu, 22 Dec 2005 13:13:20 -0700
Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> • #2714
Jabber Binding Supports Request/Response - existence proof of shared MEPs
Thu, 22 Dec 2005 14:46:51 -0500
[email protected] • #2713
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Thu, 22 Dec 2005 00:35:44 -0500
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2712
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 19:59:09 -0500
[email protected] • #2711
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 19:50:19 -0500
[email protected] • #2710
Re: What it means to "get rid of MEPs"
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 19:42:03 -0500
[email protected] • #2709
Re: What it means to "get rid of MEPs"
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:55:18 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2708
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:50:16 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2707
What it means to "get rid of MEPs"
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:46:15 -0500
[email protected] • #2706
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:13:39 -0500
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2705
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:02:14 -0800
Anish Karmarkar <[email protected]> • #2704
Re: [Fwd: Toward more fully-formed options]
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 08:42:52 -0800
Anish Karmarkar <[email protected]> • #2703
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 11:32:53 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2702
Re: [Fwd: Toward more fully-formed options]
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 11:24:35 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2701
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:09:31 -0500
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2700
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:43:03 -0500
[email protected] • #2699
Re: Resolution of issue Rec39
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:24:51 -0500
[email protected] • #2698
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:22:38 +0100 (MET)
Yves Lafon <[email protected]> • #2697
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:21:04 -0500
[email protected] • #2696
Re: [Fwd: Toward more fully-formed options]
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:11:32 -0500
[email protected] • #2695
Re: [Fwd: Toward more fully-formed options]
Tue, 20 Dec 2005 23:12:52 -0800
Anish Karmarkar <[email protected]> • #2694
Re: Response envelope optional vs. response optional
Tue, 20 Dec 2005 14:45:16 -0800
Anish Karmarkar <[email protected]> • #2693
Re: Resolution of issue Rec39
Tue, 20 Dec 2005 14:35:10 -0800
Anish Karmarkar <[email protected]> • #2692
Re: Resolution of issue Rec39
Thu, 15 Dec 2005 18:13:10 -0500
[email protected] • #2691
[Fwd: [Standards-JIG] DRAFT: JEP-0072 (SOAP Over XMPP)]
Wed, 14 Dec 2005 14:14:26 -0700
Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> • #2690
Re: [Fwd: Toward more fully-formed options]
Wed, 14 Dec 2005 16:07:37 -0500
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2689
Re: [Fwd: Toward more fully-formed options]
Wed, 14 Dec 2005 15:49:27 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2688
Re: [Fwd: Toward more fully-formed options]
Wed, 14 Dec 2005 15:38:00 -0500
Mark Baker <[email protected]> • #2687
Re: [Fwd: Toward more fully-formed options]
Wed, 14 Dec 2005 15:29:09 -0500
David Hull <[email protected]> • #2686
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.