Versioning of Web Services prior to EHP1

[Former Member]

Hi!

Right now we are working on PI 7.1 and we wish to have some version control on our web services. I cannot find any explicit versioning system for services in the Service Registry.

Basically I would like to be able to set a Web Service as "deprecated" or similar, if I develop non-backwards-compatible changes.

In EHP1 there are introduced some functionality for versioning of WebServices, but my question is how has this be done prior to EHP1? Anyone experienced this, and is there maybe some other way to solve this?

Thanks!

regards Ole

[Former Member]

Hi!

I think the best and easiest way is to work with software component versions. Thus working with the "official" versioning concept of objects in ESR. All other ways would have organizational impact on your side.

Regards,

Volker

[Former Member]

Hi

Thanks for that. By this you mean create a new version (say 2.0) for the Software Component Version I already have? I cannot see how this is going to reflect the Service Registry...maybe that is not the case?

I can see that it creates a development environment where you can access different SWCVs and keep control, but wouldn't it require copying of objects from one version to another and thus cause a lot of redundant objects in ESR?

Maybe I'm a bit lost here, great if you have some more input...

Thanks again.

regards Ole

[Former Member]

This message was moderated.

[Former Member]

Hi Ole!

This is the essence of versioning. For a new version you always create a new object (version) keeping the old version. But you do not have to copy all objects from one SWCV to a new one.

You might just copy the ones you want to change and leave the others in the old SWCV. This keeps thing less complex concerning the number of objects in your ESR. On the other hand you always have to take in mind several SWCV when changes have to be done.

You may also say and decide (for yourself) that every time a new SWCV is created ALL objects move to the new SWCV regardless of they are to be changed or not. Doing it this way of course creates a lot of objects in the ESR but you always only have to deal with ONE SWCV knowing the others are completely depreciated. I think this makes thing easier to handle. And who cares about all these "dead" objects in the ESR. They just "eat" a little piece of space in the database and not more.

Regards,

Volker

[Former Member]

Hi

Thanks again! I thought I closed this thread yesterday, I got a link from a colleague that explained what you are saying, https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/weblogs?blog=/pub/wlg/13260. [original link is broken] [original link is broken] [original link is broken] I didn't find this link when searching. Anyway, points given and the sun is shining!

regards Ole

[Former Member]

Thanx and have a nice day!

Regards,

Volker