Mailing-List: contact general-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@xml.apache.org
Message-ID: <3B0D8D0A.252489D3@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 00:36:58 +0200
From: Martin Stricker <shugal@gmx.de>
Organization: Homapage http://www.martin-stricker.de/
 http://www.masterportal24.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.cgi Webmaster-Forum
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: general@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: [xml-commons][VOTE] META-INF/services
References: <20010523104432.93469.qmail@web12101.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Shane Curcuru schrieb:
> ---- you cmanolache@yahoo.com wrote ----
> > > Question #5: Should we add code to pick up
> > > "org.xml.sax.parser" default from META-INF/services (to
> > > be consistent across the board?) right now the
> > > code just looks at System.getProperty. (my vote +1)
> 
> > +1
> > That should be done in org.xml.sax - but I'm not
> > sure we can/should modify
> > the original APIs.
> >
> > If you think it's ok to do so - it would be just
> > great !
> 
> +0 from Shane.  We need more discussion on what it
> means to have external sources checked in here.
> First off, I'd really like to see only 'authentic'
> sources originally populated directly from external
> standards bodies or the like (D.Megginson, Sun,
> whoever).
> 
> Then the original sources should be tagged with the
> specific name/identifier/version number that the
> external standards body uses for that release, so we
> know exactly which version of our sources matches with
> what other people may have gotten from external
> standards bodies (I'd call them 'ESB's but then I'd
> think of Red Hook beer 8-)
> 
> I think we should then, after a discussion/vote on the
> commons or general list, feel free to modify the
> sources if we need to.  But a little caution is called
> for so we don't give users compatibility problems with
> their other pre-existing applications.
> 
> Oh, and we need to double-check licenses too.  I'd say
> have our files all just point to the apache license,
> instead of copying and pasting the text into every
> file, and then have a separate license file for
> top-level subdirectories that reminds people the files
> there have a different license.

I think we should *not* alter external code due to compatibility issues.
The only exception I can think of (any other reasons?) is to fix bugs.
Even there we should be *very* careful!

Best regards,
Martin Stricker
-- 
Homepage http://www.martin-stricker.de/
Registered Linux user #210635 http://counter.li.org/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail:     webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail:          general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org