jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gianugo Rabellino" <g.rabell...@sourcesense.com>
Subject Re: jcr-cmis sandbox
Date Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:08:38 GMT

thanks for this. From the peanut gallery (Troy McLure moment: hi
Jackrabbits, you might remember me for being an initial mentor of
Jackrabbit, and being dragged away since graduation, yet keeping a
place in my heart for the project) I have been both interested and
quite skeptical about CMIS: maybe it's just me being an old fart, but
I love protocols more than I fancy APIs, still I can see how CMIS has
a fair deal of shortcomings.

Having said that:

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 7:17 PM, David Nuescheler <david@day.com> wrote:
> I am currently working in a technical committee on OASIS defining a
> document management interoperability specification called CMIS [1].
> CMIS shoots for a protocol level interoperability between applications
> and various repository vendors.
> The specification is in a very early stage and a lot of things
> need to be addressed [2], but it has peeked the interest of a number
> of people at Apache already.

Yup, that would include myself - again as an optimist hoping that
major CMIS issues might get addressed. Also, you might count on a
number of engineers in my organization (disclosure: that'll be
www.sourcesense.com) who are very much interested in the proposed
standard: we have already been thinking about ways to get our hands
dirty, and this sounds like a great opportunity.

> Since functionally the CMIS specification is a subset of the
> JCR specification it allows a very simple and straight-forward mapping to
> a fully compliant JCR repository such as Jackrabbit.

Indeed. Not to mention that, as you righteously note, having a CMIS
implementation working against the JCR RI should be useful to all
those repositories exposing a JCR layer, so I can clearly smell useful

> Similar to the existing protocol layers (webdav etc) on top of
> JCR that are already part of Jackrabbit, I would like to propose
> that we initiate first tests with an implementation in a sandbox
> project.
> I think that there are going to be a lot of benefits from such
> an implementation. First it will allow any JCR implementation
> to be CMIS compliant automatically (once the specification
> is released ;) ) and allow us to find the issues to be fixed
> in the specification itself and drive it into a good direction.

That alone is a noble and worthwhile goal. I do believe that a wire
protocol could be really useful to the CM world and, assuming that the
TC sees the light and doesn't come up with a white elephant, I can see
value in the ASF being the good steward of an implementation providing
guidance, critique, feedback and continuous reality check to the spec

> Let me know what you think.

FWIW, I would applaud at that effort and would be following it
closely. Happy to help, if help is needed!


Gianugo Rabellino
M: +44 779 5364 932 / +39 389 44 26 846
Sourcesense - making sense of Open Source: http://www.sourcesense.com

View raw message