abdera-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Davanum Srinivas <dava...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Abdera status and future
Date Tue, 05 May 2009 21:03:47 GMT

+1 to nuke axiom. No problems at all from me. Definitely recommend doing that.


On 05/05/2009 04:32 PM, James M Snell wrote:
> Ok, so I've got a fix for the ant build pending commit... for some
> reason the svn.apache.org server is not responding right now so I will
> commit that as soon as possible.
> In the meantime, I'd like to discuss Abdera plans moving forward.
> I know the 1.0 release was voted on but was never actually cut. I'm
> going to try to get that pushed out in the next week or two.
> Moving foward, there are a number of changes and refactorings I'd like
> to look at:
> 1. Axiom does a good job of handling the XML infoset stuff Abdera needs
> but it brings along with it a number of dependencies and extra stuff
> that we just don't need (like all the SOAP stuff). In an ideal world,
> Abdera would be entirely self-contained. I would like to start
> investigating what it would take to remove the Axiom dependency from
> Abdera altogether. This would mean duplicating a large part of the Axiom
> functionality, but we'd be able to do so in a way that was highly
> optimized for Abdera's purposes. This would mean a pretty much complete
> rewrite of the FOM* implementation classes but should not lead to any
> significant API changes. It would give us significantly greater control
> over the parsing process, would allow us to make certain dependencies
> (like Jaxen) optional, and would reduce our overall install footprint.
> Initially, the new implementation could sit along side the Axiom based
> implementation through it's development, and would eventually replace
> the Axiom implementation as the default. I know there are some folks
> here that are fans of Axiom (hello Dims! :-)...) and I don't want to
> upset them, but I think there are a number of important benefits to
> replacing Axiom that cannot be overlooked. Thoughts welcome.
> 2. The Abdera i18n code (IRI, unicode, uri templates, etc) should be
> moved to its own subproject under the Abdera Top Level Project. It is
> extremely useful independent of the rest of Abdera and should be
> developed and promoted independently.
> 3. I'm going to be working to integrating the more fully featured RSS
> capabilities contributed by a fellow IBMer. I'm not really all that
> happy with the way it was implemented in the offered patch so I'm going
> to go back through it. Unfortunately I didn't have the opportunity to
> dig into the patch before, but now that I have time to devote to Abdera
> again, I will go through it in more detail.
> 4. Simplification! I wish to continue working to simplify the Abdera
> implementation and APIs and to refine the implementation, configuration,
> etc. In some cases, this may mean API changes, some of which may not be
> backwards compatible but will continue the trend towards a better,
> easier to use, more functional Atom implementation.
> Whatcha think...
> - James

View raw message