incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "robert burrell donkin" <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: JAXB API target
Date Wed, 07 Jun 2006 20:36:03 GMT
i've posted a first draft at
http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/SpecificationRepository but luckily i did see
this point coming :-)

(it's rough so please feel free to dive in and improve)

On 6/7/06, Manfred Geiler <manolito@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Don't forget, that the JSF API is a little bit different to other spec
> APIs. Other than common spec APIs that almost consist of interfaces
> only, in JSF there are lots of classes with lots of code and logic.
> So, when I think of JSF API 1.2, I doubt that it would be easy to
> separate api development from impl development.


yep - that's cool.

this must not be some attempt to grab specifications from projects if it
doesn't make sense. the problem is ATM that there isn't any place for
specifications even if a project wanted (for whatever reason) to maintain
the codebase elsewhere.

And: Don't forget about TCK testing. We are not allowed to publish a
> final version of any spec API if it did not pass the TCK. But, AFAIK,
> TCK testing is not possible without the according impl classes. This
> applies to all API classes, not only MyFaces! So, what sense would it
> make to separate API from the impl development?
>

(i'll refrain from commenting on the legal aspects)

but there may come a time when the TCK is passed :-)

My proposal is to
> - Put the API sources where they belong to: the corresponding ASF project
>   that is: JAXB API --> JaxMe, JSF API --> MyFaces, ...


i think the option should be with the project. if a project feels it makes
sense to host an API, that's cool, if they want to maintain it separate,
then that should be cool too.

- Possibly establish a dummy TLP project that collects all API jars
> under one umbrella and that acts as a base (resp. eponym) for the
> Maven repository. This way people who only need an API jar would not
> have to search for the corresponding ASF project. They go to the
> central "java-specs" project and download the API jar there or they
> use "java-specs.apache.org" as Maven groupId when they define their
> dependencies. For an example, this way someone could write a JSF
> application without any (Maven) dependency to the MyFaces project. The
> dependeny would look like this:
> <dependency>
>    <groupId>java-specs.apache.org</groupId>
>    <artifactId>jsf-api</artifactId>
>    <version>1.2</version>
> </dependency>


top level projects take quite a lot of overhead. establishing a dummy top
level project would not only take a long time and energy but would beg the
question: why bother?

it should be possible to create a central contact point at jakarta without
this overhead.

- robert

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message