jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Roland Weber <ossf...@dubioso.net>
Subject Re: The state of WebDAV Clients
Date Tue, 27 Nov 2007 18:53:46 GMT
Hello all,

Ard Schrijvers wrote:
> I just read this thread where they discuus merging WebDav client from
> slide and HttpComponents into a new TLP [1]. I don't know the current
> status.
> 
> [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/general@jakarta.apache.org/msg13631.html

The followup to that thread was [2], see the second paragraph. The
HttpComponents TLP has been approved by the board, we'll spend the next
months on the move itself. Our scope is "HTTP and related protocols".
WebDAV is an extension of HTTP, hence in scope :-)

[2]
http://www.mail-archive.com/httpcomponents-dev@jakarta.apache.org/msg02691.html
[3] http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/TLPHttpComponents


Jukka Zitting wrote:
> I'm interested in pushing forward the idea (that's already been aired
> a few times) of starting a new WebDAV project in the Apache Incubator
> to provide a single forum that all interested people could find and
> join. At first we probably wouldn't even need to know which existing
> codebase to start working on or even if there really are enough
> contributors to get such a project started, but at least we'd have a
> way to find out the answers to such questions.

I'm in for HttpComponents, but will have minimal time for coding
for months to come. My first priority is and remains HttpComponents,
in particular getting the HttpClient 4.0 API to beta. I bring in
knowledge of the successor to the HttpClient 3.x API, but I'm totally
blank regarding WebDAV. I've cross-read the RFC, that's it.

Starting an Incubator project just to see whether there is interest
will not work. The entry criteria are clearly stated: [4]
we need a proposal, a champion (person), a sponsor (project), and
three mentors. That won't be easy for a proposal that reads
"we'd like to see whether there is interest". Code is indeed not
required, but we better have an interested _developer_ community to
show if we want to attract mentors and pass the acceptance vote.

[4]
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Entry+to+Incubation


Angela Schreiber wrote:
> i would support that idea as long as we can make sure, that we
> will be able to add some additional code in order to have
> a dav-client and will be able to support and work on it.

If it's going to HttpComponents, that will be our goal too.
"Reusable components" for other projects to use and extend.

> from my experience with webdav and the open source community
> i'd say that "If there are enough interested people"
> is always true but we should be looking for "If there are enough
> active developers" too :). 

Only too true. It's not too hard to take either the Slide client
or the Jackrabbit WebDAV client code and repackage that. But to
become a viable independent codebase, we'd need unit test coverage.
Otherwise, we couldn't touch the code without risking to break
something. I don't know about the Jackrabbit client, but Slide
had none. My rough guess is that it takes as much effort to write
testcases than it took to write the code itself. Because ideally,
every functionality in the client is covered by a testcase. Any
volunteers for spending several months on writing testcases...?
I can offer to port the test framework from HttpComponents, which
includes test HTTP servers.

> who is willing to sponsor the development of a webdav client?

If you mean "Sponsor" as defined by the Incubator... give
HttpComponents a few months to complete the TLP move, then we
should be ready to take on that role. If it's about spending
time on development, see my remarks above. Time is short, and
I don't need a WebDAV client for anything I do...

cheers,
  Roland


Mime
View raw message