Bug 1015144 - FSW 6.0.0 ER3 quickstart bpel-service/loan_approval - Readme.md
Summary: FSW 6.0.0 ER3 quickstart bpel-service/loan_approval - Readme.md
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: JBoss Fuse Service Works 6
Classification: JBoss
Component: Examples
Version: 6.0.0 GA
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ER5
: ---
Assignee: Keith Babo
QA Contact: Jiri Sedlacek
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-10-03 14:04 UTC by ppecka
Modified: 2015-08-02 23:45 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-02-06 15:25:13 UTC
Type: Bug


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description ppecka 2013-10-03 14:04:07 UTC
Description of problem:
quickstart test output fomr mvn exec:java does not comply to what is stated as expected output in Readme.md

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
FSW 6.0.0 ER3

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. follow Readme file


Actual results:
SOAP Reply:
<SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"><SOAP-ENV:Header><ns:conversationId xmlns:ns="http://www.jboss.org/cid">12345</ns:conversationId><ns:exampleHeader xmlns:ns="http://www.jboss.org/header">Outbound</ns:exampleHeader></SOAP-ENV:Header><SOAP-ENV:Body><requestResponse xmlns="http://example.com/loan-approval/loanService/">
  <tns:accept xmlns:tns="http://example.com/loan-approval/loanService/">yes</tns:accept>
</requestResponse></SOAP-ENV:Body></SOAP-ENV:Envelope>

Expected results:
<SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/">
   <SOAP-ENV:Header/>
   <SOAP-ENV:Body>
      <requestResponse xmlns="http://example.com/loan-approval/loanService/">
         <tns:accept xmlns:tns="http://example.com/loan-approval/loanService/">yes</tns:accept>
      </requestResponse>
   </SOAP-ENV:Body>
</SOAP-ENV:Envelope>

Comment 1 Keith Babo 2013-10-14 19:17:52 UTC
Gary - note the addition of conversationId in the reply.  Running this by you to make sure it's cool before we update the README.

Comment 2 Gary Brown 2013-10-15 08:05:53 UTC
Hi Keith, yes the two header values (conversationId and exampleHeader) are now valid in the response.

Comment 3 Jiri Sedlacek 2013-10-18 09:27:50 UTC
verified in ER6


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.