openmeetings-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "seba.wagner@gmail.com" <seba.wag...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: GSoC 2016: Status and some concerns regarding caldav4j
Date Sun, 08 May 2016 23:14:51 GMT
Hi Ankush,

yeah it sounds like you are already all over it :) That's good. I don't
want to restrict you in your investigation and progressing this.

My only concern is that I do not have enough context to really asses how
much of an issue it what's a realistic time frame for this task.

Can we maybe do some partial migration, just to fit our needs?
As far as I understood at the moment you have some issues in building this
code. Is that with the master branch or also with this JackRabbit branch?

Thanks,
Sebastian


2016-05-08 23:45 GMT+12:00 Ankush Mishra <ankushmishra9@gmail.com>:

> Just a couple things to address with respect to this issue, on thread
> which Sebastian mentioned: https://github.com/caldav4j/caldav4j/issues/13
>
> The username "TheAntimist", would be mine. As Sebastian mentioned that:
>
>     From what I understood in that thread is that JackRabbit APIs are
>    not compatible as it was not build for being re-used or a plugin
>    replacement for Apache Slide.
>
> I have been working on this issue, along with getting used to the CalDAV
> protocol itself. Well, originally back in 2011 when this issue was made on
> Google Code, jackrabbit-webdav, did not implement:
>
>    |The acl stuff is missing even in jackrabbit - but this may be changed.
> |
>
> |This is with relation specifically to RFC3744 [1]. When I restarted this
> thread on the status, the issue seemed to be the same, but what I checked
> was ||according to
> https://jackrabbit.apache.org/jcr/components/jackrabbit-webdav-library.html
> RFC 3744 (Access Control Protocol) has been implemented. Though, not sure
> till what ||extent, though. Here's the Javadoc on the package though:
> http://jackrabbit.apache.org/api/1.4/org/apache/jackrabbit/webdav/security/package-summary.html
>
> When I checked the ||/org.apache.jackrabbit.webdav.security/ code, I
> mostly see all the privileges and the rest being implemented. Though, when
> I sent out a mail on jackrabbit-users group with regard to the status, I
> haven't gotten back a reply on the issue, the thread there seems pretty
> much dead. Though, it should be implemented, mostly.
>
> Other than that, there also exists a caldav4j-jackrabbit, branch here:
> https://github.com/caldav4j/caldav4j/tree/caldav4j-jackrabbit
>
> I feel, that I can work on this. Since, I sort of started already, and a
> lot of work seems to have been already done in that branch. If possible, I
> can do it by this week.
>
> But other than this, do you want me to be working also, on the client,
> which I have already, fleshed out the basics, should start coding soon.
>
> [1] http://www.webdav.org/specs/rfc3744.html
> |
>
> ||
> ||
>
> Ankush Mishra
>
> On 08-05-2016 16:37, Maxim Solodovnik wrote:
>
>> I haven't check the code
>> not sure, but maybe I can try to start migration, not sure if I will have
>> enough time for that :(
>>
>> On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 4:04 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <mailto:
>> seba.wagner@gmail.com> <seba.wagner@gmail.com <mailto:
>> seba.wagner@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi Maxim,
>>
>>     I don't think so. The caldav4j team tried to do the migration for
>>     over 1
>>     year now:
>>     https://github.com/caldav4j/caldav4j/issues/13
>>
>>     And they still have not succeeded.
>>
>>     We can give it a try but I doubt it's that simple. From what I
>>     understood
>>     in that thread is that JackRabbit APIs are not compatible as it
>>     was not
>>     build for being re-used or a plugin replacement for Apache Slide.
>>     So there
>>     will be substantial work to do here.
>>
>>     Thx
>>     Sebastian
>>
>>
>>     2016-05-08 21:47 GMT+12:00 Maxim Solodovnik <solomax666@gmail.com
>>     <mailto:solomax666@gmail.com>>:
>>
>>     > sure, NP, I can place it into our repo as soon as you feel it's
>>     ready :)
>>     >
>>     > when it will be ready
>>     > please send me the URL to the repo and some basic build instructions
>>     >
>>     > On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Ankush Mishra
>>     <ankushmishra9@gmail.com <mailto:ankushmishra9@gmail.com>>
>>     > wrote:
>>     >
>>     > > Thanks for the response. I'll try to complete by next week.
>>     And since the
>>     > > library isn't in Maven Central, we'll have to place it in the
>>     > OpenMeetings
>>     > > repo, as well.
>>     > >
>>     > > Ankush Mishra
>>     > > On 8 May 2016 15:04, "Maxim Solodovnik" <solomax666@gmail.com
>>     <mailto:solomax666@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>     > >
>>     > >> Hello Sebastian,
>>     > >>
>>     > >> usually library replacement is as simple as update pom.xml
>>     and perform
>>     > >> full text replace of classes/packages
>>     > >> seems to be easy
>>     > >>
>>     > >> I believe this can be done as part of GSOC project without
>>     any major
>>     > >> effect to the roadmap
>>     > >>
>>     > >> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:05 AM, seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>     <mailto:seba.wagner@gmail.com> <
>>     > >> seba.wagner@gmail.com <mailto:seba.wagner@gmail.com>>
wrote:
>>     > >>
>>     > >>> Hi Maxim,
>>     > >>>
>>     > >>> during the meeting we discussed a few points:
>>     > >>>
>>     > >>> 1) I added Ankush and Dima to Jira and assigned the tickets
>>     > >>>
>>     > >>> 2) We had a quick chat around Caldav and libraries.
>>     > >>> https://github.com/caldav4j
>>     > >>> Seems to support it but has a few issues in compiling. That
is
>>     > something
>>     > >>> we can fix.
>>     > >>> But it is using a deprecated library
>>     (http://jakarta.apache.org/slide/
>>     > >>> ).
>>     > >>> We would need to lift this to use the library to use
>>     > >>> http://jackrabbit.apache.org/ instead. However this has not
>>     been done
>>     > >>> yet.
>>     > >>>
>>     > >>> So the issue is that we need to decide on if we want to do
>>     this as part
>>     > >>> of GSoC.
>>     > >>> This could be a quite significant piece of work. If we added
>>     to the
>>     > >>> scope of this project it could mean less time in doing any
>>     actual
>>     > >>> OpenMeetings enhancements.
>>     > >>>
>>     > >>> What do you think?
>>     > >>>
>>     > >>> Thanks,
>>     > >>> Sebastian
>>     > >>>
>>     > >>>
>>     > >>> --
>>     > >>> Sebastian Wagner
>>     > >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>     <https://twitter.com/#%21/dead_lock>
>>     > >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com <mailto:seba.wagner@gmail.com>
>>     > >>>
>>     > >>
>>     > >>
>>     > >>
>>     > >> --
>>     > >> WBR
>>     > >> Maxim aka solomax
>>     > >>
>>     > >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > --
>>     > WBR
>>     > Maxim aka solomax
>>     >
>>
>>
>>
>>     --
>>     Sebastian Wagner
>>     https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock <https://twitter.com/#%21/dead_lock>
>>     seba.wagner@gmail.com <mailto:seba.wagner@gmail.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> WBR
>> Maxim aka solomax
>>
>


-- 
Sebastian Wagner
https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
seba.wagner@gmail.com

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