commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "James Strachan" <james_strac...@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject Re: [Latka][Proposal] Make Jelly a required dependency?
Date Mon, 14 Oct 2002 13:33:28 GMT
From: "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <nicolaken@apache.org>
> dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
> > Is there a rule somewhere about not having sandbox components as a
> > dependency? Or is this a general call to move Jelly to commons?
>
> It's really time Jelly goes to Commons proper, don't you think?
> It's more active than Latka itself ATM, and used by more and more
> Jakarta projects.
>
> +1
>
> Let's see the plan :-)

:-)

I'd really like a stable release of Jelly out ASAP so migrating it to the
commons proper sounds like a great idea.

Though I am having second thoughts on whether Commons is the right place for
Jelly; maybe it should be a top level Jakarta project? Jelly started out as
a little reusable XML scripting engine that could be embedded anywhere and
is increasingly growing in scope to have all kinds of add-on libraries like
JellyUnit, JellySwing and to do things like SOAP scripting (via Apache
Axis).

So I'm starting to think it needs to be a top level project with its own
sub-projects. Do others think this is a good idea? Either way I'd like to
see Jelly promoted very soon.

Incidentally Jelly also has dependencies on Jexl which would need to be
promoted to the commons proper too before a release could be made.

James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message