From: ddossot <do-...@jb...> - 2006-06-20 11:36:09
|
This is a dual reply (sorry for the delay). * Mule & Transformation: I have been using Mule quite extensively for a client and I confirm their transformation model is really good. In fact I have implemented the "Transform Raw Data to Raw XML" and "XSL Processor accessing a data cache" that I mentionned before as Mule transformers. * Re: "http://milyn.codehaus.org/Transforming+a+SOAP+Message", this is extremely promising approach. Could the bean be defined in Groovy to avoid compiling it? It would complicate the administration of the ESB if people had to use a compiler when editing the configuration. Now as a general matter, one thing that was annoying (to me) with Mule is that I basically had to take a node down to modify a transformation chain. For my project, this was ok but for a central ESB, this is not an option. I am expecting that whatever approach you guys follow, it will not mandate a service disruption to be deployed. I reckon that the Smooks-driven transformation will be hot reloadable. Thanks! David View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3951928#3951928 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3951928 |