xml-commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From shane_curc...@us.ibm.com
Subject Re: xml-commons charter
Date Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:30:42 GMT
(Apologies if this is a dup, mailer problems abound this week)
---- you Jeff Turner <jeff@socialchange.net.au> wrote ----
[jt]>> What needs to change? Do you see something specific? This
paragraph from xml-commons/README.html:
>   New modules generally shouldn't go in until at least two separate
>  other projects express interest in using the module. I think this is
>  an important difference from jakarta-commons that makes sense in our
>  world. I.e. I'd rather not just throw something in because it seems
>  like it might be useful, I'd rather only put things in that we know
>  will be shared among multiple projects.
[jt]>This excludes all code developed by "third parties", outside the
jakarta|xml.apache.org world. Does this matter? Well if you look at
jakarta-commons, *most* of the code comes from
outside Apache. Eg, someone developed a utility for a commercial
project, and wants to give it a larger audience. Exactly my situation
with DoctypeChanger.

[sc](Sorry, I'm on my icky machine without good linewrapping)
OK, the above para in the charter doesn't restrict any code developed
by third parties at all!  Other than ASF restrictions, any code is
welcome.  I.e. since everything checked into xml.apache.org has to be
under the Apache license, we can't checkin any commercial software.


[jt]> So I think the "until at least two separate other projects
express
interest in using the module" clause will rather limit this project's
growth. But then, is this a bad thing? There's no reason XML-specific
utility
code can't live in jakarta-commons.

[sc] Yes, the 'until at least two ... other projects' was meant to
limit growth.  I think it's a valueable experiment to try to form a
slightly different community than jakarta-commons.  Part of this is
because both the tools and (more importantly) the communities of xml
and jakarta are quite different.  Part is I'd like to use xml-commons
to try to work more seriously at getting better cross-xml-project
coordination.

[jt]> Only justification I can see is that:
[jt]> - Jakarta has a server-side focus, whereas xml.apache.org
doesn't(AFAIK).
[jt]> - jakarta-commons reflects that server-side focus, and could
   conceivably object to client-side XML utilities.
[jt]>  - xml.apache.org is language-neutral, jakarta.apache.org isn't.
   xml-commons could accept a C/C++ catalog implementation, whereas
   jakarta-commons wouldn't.

[sc] - Actually the different communities/different projects justifies
it for me.  Part is the 'xml application stack' idea in xml.apache.org:
where all the parts fit together to host xml-based applications of
multiple levels (xerces -> xalan -> entity catalog -> cocoon -> servlet
engine -> etc)  This means we should try to get the projects to plan
and work much more closely together.
[sc] - Also, xml has plenty of server-side focus: it's just not so
obvious, since some of the xml tools are just cogs in a machine, and
rely on a framework (cocoon, etc.) to tie into the server specifically.
[sc] - And yes, I'd love to see more C/C++ stuff submitted - I can't
help much myself since my C is too rusty, but the Xerces-C and Xalan-C
folks would certainly appreciate it!



[jt]> Another question: what projects do people *want* in xml-commons
anyway apart from DOM/SAX/JAXP, Catalogs, Shane's env checker and
possibly Doctypechanger?

[sc] Precisely why I wanted to keep the growth here slow: I'd like to
be more calculated and specific in plans than jakarta-commons.  If this
really upsets folks and they abandon us and just submit to
jakarta-commons instead, then we can re-evaluate, but I think it's a
very worthy experiment to try to manage this project more closely.

[jt]> Personally, I think stripped-down, highly focused Cocoon-based
apps ("spinoffs") would be a good idea. Cocoon is dynamite, but it's
too big and general.

[sc] Possible - sounds neat.  I'd like to see more detailed use cases
and designs first, and then see positive feedback from several other
users before going forward.
(Of course I am aware of the irony of me saying that when I just
checked in Which that was un-publicly-asked for - trust me, I felt bad
about that)

[jt]> What do people think? Especially the founders of this project..
here's this bunch of new kids, walk in and start changing charters...
;) If there's interest, I can modify README.html and call a [VOTE]..

[sc] Sure you're old enough to vote, kid? 8-)
Let's work on this discussion for a bit and get more participants.  If
needed we might cross-post once to general@xml to get more folks to
come look over here (I was impressed you all actually subscribed! I
thought it was still edwin and sam and me!)  I'm glad there's interest
here, it will remind me to come back to visit more from the many
emergencies at work...
- Shane

=====
<eof aka="mailto:shane_curcuru@lotus.com"
 BartSays="Nobody reads these anymore."/>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com



Mime
View raw message