incubator-yoko-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Kulp <daniel.k...@iona.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Project Status
Date Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:20:46 GMT

I'm not a Yoko committer so I really don't have much of an official say, 
but here's my 2 cents anyway....

Looking through the code and even the community email lists, etc..., 
there looks like there are two "subprojects" in Yoko:

1) The core orb and related stuff.   
Basically, "core", "yoko-spec-corba", "rmi-spec", and "rmi-impl".   
These are definitely the things Geronimo and Harmony are most interested 
in.   

2) The "Web Service" binding components.
The "api", "bindings", "tools", and "maven-plugin" modules.
These consist mostly of plugins to CXF, tooling around those, etc... to 
allow the use of the CXF apis (JAX-WS) to communicate with CORBA apps.  

The stuff in #2 actually has no dependency on the stuff in #1.   The 
binding stuff should work with almost any ORB.   (Kind of evident by the 
threads from Lukas getting it to work with Jacorg.)   However, #2 is 
heavily dependent on CXF.   When CXF makes major changes, it tends to 
break that stuff.    Also, that has caused issues with the release 
schedules  as it kind of ties to the Yoko releases to CXF releases.


So, my question is, would another TLP be interested in BOTH parts or 
should we look into splitting them?   I know Geronimo and Harmony both 
want #1.   However, would they be interested in the #2 stuff (since it's 
also tied fairly heavily to CXF)?      If not, would it make sense to 
move #1 to Geronimo or Harmony and move the #2 stuff to CXF?   I 
obviously cannot speak for the entire CXF community, but I cannot 
imagine major objections to that.   It would definitely provide an extra 
little differentiator.

Anyway, those are my thoughts.  Like I said, I'm not a Yoko committer, 
but I do have interest in the CXF plugins being kept around in addition 
to the ORB stuff.

Dan




On Sunday 29 July 2007 21:48, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> Guys,
>
> The Yoko project has been in incubation for about 18 months now.  I
> did a quick look through the mail archives and didn't see a lot of
> discussion about next steps for the project.  Certainly the project
> is important to other projects like Apache Geronimo and Apache
> OpenEJB.   Has there been any recent discussions about how to move
> forward with the project?  Top-level, joining another TLP as a sub-
> project (Geronimo / Harmony come to mind).
>
> I'd like to hear people's thoughts on what they are thinking.
>
> Cheers
>
> Matt

-- 
J. Daniel Kulp
Principal Engineer
IONA
P: 781-902-8727    C: 508-380-7194
daniel.kulp@iona.com
http://www.dankulp.com/blog

Mime
View raw message