On 9/1/06, Nicolas Modrzyk <Nicolas.Modrzyk@macnica.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I had a look at Graffito before, and while it looked promising the
> site hasn't been updated since february, and no activity has been
> recorded for a while now (5 weeks ago the license header was updated).
>
> Does anyone knows what the status of the project is ?
>
> If the project is still moving then yes, this is a great move to do.
>
> Nicolas,
>

The OCM haven't moved too much lately, mainly because of 2 reasons:
- the core 2 developers (Christopher and myself) have been quite busy
(sometimes it happens)
- the tool has already reached a good enough state (I am using it on
InfoQ.com authoring tool).

hth,

./alex
--
:Architect of InfoQ.com:
 .w( the_mindstorm )p.

> On Sep 1, 2006, at 5:50 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > The incubating Graffito project
> > (http://incubator.apache.org/graffito/) is building a nice
> > portlet-based content management framework. One of the design goals is
> > to be independent of the underlying storage model using mapping tools
> > to present a pure Java object model to higher level components.
> > Graffito is currently is using Apache OJB to achieve this on top of
> > relational databases, but they also want to support JCR content
> > repositories as storage components. To achieve this they've already
> > created a relatively complete object-content mapping (ocm) tool called
> > Graffito JCR Mapping
> > (http://incubator.apache.org/graffito/jcr-mapping/).
> >
> > There was recent discussion on the Graffito mailing lists about the
> > ocm tool being ptoentially useful to other people as well, and that
> > being a Graffito subproject probably doesn't give the tool enough
> > visibility among JCR users. One idea would be to graduate the Graffito
> > JCR Mapping subproject into a Jackrabbit subproject to get greater
> > exposure. The initial response within the Graffito community was
> > positive to this idea, so I'd like to ask for opinions also from the
> > Jackrabbit community. Would you think that bringing in the ocm tool
> > would be a good addition to the set on-top-of-JCR components we
> > already have?
> >
> > There are a number of stakeholders to consider and practical issues to
> > sort out to actually make the idea happen, but I can start taking care
> > of those if there is general consensus that this would be a good move.
> >
> > BR,
> >
> > Jukka Zitting
> >
> > --
> > Yukatan - http://yukatan.fi/ - info@yukatan.fi
> > Software craftsmanship, JCR consulting, and Java development
>
>