commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim O'Brien <>
Subject Re: [Digester] Anyone done RSS 1.0 and RSS 2.0?
Date Sat, 31 Jan 2004 02:59:35 GMT

Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
> Quoting Simon Kitching <>:
>>On Sat, 2004-01-17 at 23:58, robert burrell donkin wrote:
>>>the RSS 0.91 is really just an example but many people find it a very 
>>>useful one. creating digestions for RSS 1.0 and/or RSS 2.0 isn't really 
>>>an itch i have but i suspect that if you were to create one and donate 
>>>it to the ASF then there are probably a lot of folks who'd be 
>>While on that topic, I would like to move the RSS stuff from the main
>>library to the "examples" section before the next Digester release.
> Defintiely +1.  But an even stronger +1 on new commons components for "pure data
> beans" that represent the data of common XML document formats like RSS.  For
> RSS itself, such a set of beans (which covered a reasonable attempt at a union
> of all the variant formats, plus a way to plug in arbitrary extension) would be
> *broadly* useful in both client and server applications that manipulate
> RSS-type data, far beyond the particular scenario of parsing XML->beans (which
> is what the Digester example does) and the reverse beans->XML direction (which
> is what an example in Betwixt does).


Good idea, but I'd suggest that maybe something like that is a good 
candidate for development outside of the ASF.  I think it is a good 
idea, but starting a Jakarta Commons project to house "pure data beans" 
for commons data formats seems outside of the commons charter - you 
start to think about boundaries, how it would scale, etc.

Robert's idea of moving the RSS stuff to an examples distribution is a 
good practical first-step.  Maybe over the next few months if someone 
steps up to the plate and donates and/or creates other Digester/Betwixt 
examples they could be moved into the same example distribution, and 
once enough momentum has developed we could create a new commons components.

I like the idea, but I think we should take small steps.  Encourage 
people to take initiative, and then see if we need YACC (yet another 
commons component) once we've got more than "n" rulesets.


>>Any objection? And if not, should we bother trying to actually move the
>>",v" files within the cvs repository to preserve file history, or just
>>"cvs rm" the old and add the current versions in the new location?
> Attempts to maintain history in this manner (moving ,v files) does not strike me
> as the right approach ... the original files will still be in the attic after
> you "cvs delete" them, and the initial commit to the new directory can include
> a pointer to where to review the prior history.
>>I'm not sure if my access rights allow me to do the former myself...
> Craig
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message