Mailing-List: contact pluto-dev-help@portals.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: pluto-dev@portals.apache.org
Reply-To: pluto-dev@portals.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <46233608.3010709@minet.uni-jena.de>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 10:38:32 +0200
From: Dettborn <dettborn@minet.uni-jena.de>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pluto-dev@portals.apache.org
Subject: Re: [jira] Commented: (PLUTO-308) This patch is for new deployment
 with JAXB instead of castor and the changes for the new API Revision from
 8 to 11.
References: <23559160.1176543735546.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
In-Reply-To: <23559160.1176543735546.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
 
Ate Douma (JIRA) schrieb:
>     [
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PLUTO-308?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12488858
]
>
> Ate Douma commented on PLUTO-308:
> ---------------------------------
>
> Sorry for the possible confusion typo: I meant "Your patch though still
includes the old ones", not just once :)
This means that the header in the source files from the api must look
like this:

    Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
           or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
           distributed with this work for additional information
           regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
           to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
           "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
           with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at

             http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0

           Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
           software distributed under the License is distributed on an
           "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
           KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the
           specific language governing permissions and limitations
           under the License.

is this right? And in the licence.txt must be included:

Apache [???1.1-286-COMPATIBILITY???]
Copyright [2007]  The Apache Software Foundation

This produt includes software developed at
The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>
>> This patch is for new deployment with JAXB instead of castor and the
changes for the new API Revision from 8 to 11.
>>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>                 Key: PLUTO-308
>>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PLUTO-308
>>             Project: Pluto
>>          Issue Type: New Feature
>>          Components: general
>>    Affects Versions: 1.1-286-COMPATIBILITY
>>            Reporter: Torsten Dettborn
>>             Fix For: 1.1-286-COMPATIBILITY
>>
>>         Attachments: jaxb_n_api-r11.080207.patch,
jaxb_n_api-r11.210207.patch, jaxb_n_api-r12.120307.patch,
patches_before_included_060407.patch,
patches_before_included_060407_No_Licence_change.patch
>>
>>
>> Christian has made a patch for the new JAXB binding for the deployment
from the portlets, because there are too many problems with the patch
(Issue 287) we decided to reject this issue and patch it all in one.
Here is the description from Christian:
>> "Unfortunately this patch is a big one. In the new spec there are
>> qnames, which are used to identify names, e.g. event names. The
>> previous implementation of the Portlet Object Model use castor
>> for xml binding. Unfortunately castor does not support qnames in
>> a way we need it. Thats why i implement the xml data binding with
>> jaxb. In the new Spec there are other points JAXB will be used,
>> therefor i think using JAXB is not a bad idea.
>> My first idea was to change the *DD classes to interfaces and then
>> let castor and jaxb implement this classes. In this case we should
>> be able to use both xml data bindings together and the user has the
>> choice.
>> But i ran into several problems with this approach. On the one hand,
>> the castor *DD classes doesn't provide all necessary methods
>> and therefor much work with the castor implementation has to be
>> done. On the other hand i want to use the classes automatically
>> generated by jaxb.
>> In my mind the best thing would be, to use the castor classes and
>> annotate them with jaxb annotations. Then there aren't as much
>> changes as with this patch.
>> I have gone the other way, a matter of time. I've delete the castor
>> things and use jaxb as the only xml data binding.
>> What this patch does:
>> I have generated (xjc maven plugin) the jaxb classes and add it to the
>> repository. Then all occurences of *DD are replaced by the jaxb *Type
>> classes. Some methods had to be renamed, and some jaxb classes had to
>> be implemented because of XMLSchema conflicts.
>> I use the JAXB RI, that is why i had to change the poms and installation
>> dependencies. I add a new JaxbDescriptorService interface and the
>> corresponding implementation.
>> Note:
>> With the current portlet-app_2_0.xsd (provided at:
>>
http://ipc658.inf-swt.uni-jena.de/spec/JSR%202.0%20API/portlet-app_2_0.xsd)
>> it is not possible to use old portlet.xml files from JSR168. This has
>> to be changed in the final release of the specification. Therefor i had
>> to change the portlet.xml files in the repo.
>> What has to be done:
>> Writing of portlet.xml and web.xml is not supported yet.
>> I would appreciate if someone could implement the (IMHO) better approach
>> of adding the jaxb annotations to the castor classes."
>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
 
iD8DBQFGIzYH0Ji0BqEIlIURAndjAJ493e1Lozg3rGy87aK0VKdwnyCtCwCeNp1p
zeDQW8J7U9g9pn7iCUh/k3w=
=MWRb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----