abdera-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James M Snell <jasn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Abdera status and future
Date Tue, 05 May 2009 21:06:53 GMT


Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> James,
>
> +1 to nuke axiom. No problems at all from me. Definitely recommend 
> doing that.
>
Wanna help? :-)

- James

> thanks,
> dims
>
> 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
>

Mime
View raw message