Mailing-List: contact geronimo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [jsr109] JAXR
From: Srinath Perera <hemapani@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk>
Reply-To: hemapani@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk
To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: dims@yahoo.com
In-Reply-To: <20031107060837.27307.qmail@web12810.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031107060837.27307.qmail@web12810.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: Lanka Software Foundation
Message-Id: <1068190059.1809.95.camel@rook>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: 07 Nov 2003 13:27:40 +0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

thanks dims that would be even better, how to get the communication
going with them? shall we use the  JAXR RI just to get JSR109 up till
Apache impl avalible?

Thanks

Srinath

On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 12:08, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Srinath,
> 
> I was thinking more in the lines of getting the JUDDI guys to implement a client-side JAXR Impl
> that can talk to any UDDI backend.
> 
> -- dims
> 
> --- Srinath Perera <hemapani@vijayaba.cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote:
> > Hi Richard, All;
> > 
> > let us use JAXR RI to develop the JSR109 impl (let us stick to spec
> > feature's only prob is license I believe)
> > 
> > I do not see why we can't do JAXR impl, but let us get JSR109 impl archi
> > sorted out first. then have go at the JAXR .. but let us keep two
> > separated.
> > 
> > We do have people :) there are Chatura, Dasarath, and Priyanga  who did
> > the announce with me., you, Jeremy, Luis, Ias, myself 
> > plus Guillaume said he will help us as well.
> > 
> > what do you think 
> > 
> > thank 
> > 
> > Srinath
> >  
> > On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 22:31, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> > > +1 for doing an independent implementation.
> > > 
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Jeremy Boynes" <jeremy@coredevelopers.net>
> > > To: <geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org>
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 10:22 PM
> > > Subject: RE: [jsr109] JAXR
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > IANAL, but I believe the issue is with the Supplemental Binary Code
> > > License,
> > > > section B, para 1, item iv) and v)
> > > >
> > > > [you]
> > > > (iv) only distribute the Software subject to a license agreement that
> > > > protects Sun's interests consistent with the terms contained in this
> > > > Agreement
> > > >
> > > > (v) agree to defend and indemnify Sun and its licensors from and against
> > > any
> > > > damages, costs, liabilities, settlement amounts and/or expenses (including
> > > > attorneys' fees) incurred in connection with any claim, lawsuit or action
> > > by
> > > > any third party that arises or results from the use or distribution of any
> > > > and all Programs and/or Software
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jeremy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: news [mailto:news@sea.gmane.org]On Behalf Of Richard Monson-Haefel
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 12:40 AM
> > > > > To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > Subject: [jsr109] JAXR
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > JSR 109 requires support for JAXR. Specifically, it requires that J2EE
> > > > > components (ejbs, servlets/jsps, endpoints, etc.) have access to a
> > > working
> > > > > JAXR provider.  The WS-I supports/condones/whatever the use of UDDI, so
> > > we
> > > > > need a JAXR provider that at least supports UDDI (version 2.0).
> > > > >
> > > > > One way to address this is to write our own JAXR provider, but I
> > > > > would like
> > > > > to avoid that if possible. Ideally I would like to use the JAXR
> > > reference
> > > > > implementation provided by Sun Microsystems. What is the licensing
> > > issues
> > > > > with regard to using Sun's J2EE RI code?  I've heard a couple
> > > > > people suggest
> > > > > using various parts of the RI in other "subprojects", but I'm not sure
> > > if
> > > > > that's allowed by the RI license.
> > > > >
> > > > > Full functionality with JAXR is (IMO) far more important than
> > > performance.
> > > > > Its kind of hard to imagine many situations in which a really
> > > > > fast JAXR impl
> > > > > is needed. If performance is not an issue, than it would be best
> > > > > (again IMO)
> > > > > to use the RI implementation of JAXR and contribute back to that
> > > > > rather than
> > > > > roll our own. Again, I'm not totally sure if that's feasible or
> > > advisable
> > > > > and would appreciate any feedback from Apache wonks or anyone.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Richard
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > 
> > 
> 
> 
> =====
> Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
>