David, thanks for this. From the peanut gallery (Troy McLure moment: hi Jackrabbits, you might remember me for being an initial mentor of Jackrabbit, and being dragged away since graduation, yet keeping a place in my heart for the project) I have been both interested and quite skeptical about CMIS: maybe it's just me being an old fart, but I love protocols more than I fancy APIs, still I can see how CMIS has a fair deal of shortcomings.
Having said that: On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 7:17 PM, David Nuescheler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am currently working in a technical committee on OASIS defining a > document management interoperability specification called CMIS [1]. > CMIS shoots for a protocol level interoperability between applications > and various repository vendors. > > The specification is in a very early stage and a lot of things > need to be addressed [2], but it has peeked the interest of a number > of people at Apache already. Yup, that would include myself - again as an optimist hoping that major CMIS issues might get addressed. Also, you might count on a number of engineers in my organization (disclosure: that'll be www.sourcesense.com) who are very much interested in the proposed standard: we have already been thinking about ways to get our hands dirty, and this sounds like a great opportunity. > Since functionally the CMIS specification is a subset of the > JCR specification it allows a very simple and straight-forward mapping to > a fully compliant JCR repository such as Jackrabbit. Indeed. Not to mention that, as you righteously note, having a CMIS implementation working against the JCR RI should be useful to all those repositories exposing a JCR layer, so I can clearly smell useful stuff. > Similar to the existing protocol layers (webdav etc) on top of > JCR that are already part of Jackrabbit, I would like to propose > that we initiate first tests with an implementation in a sandbox > project. > I think that there are going to be a lot of benefits from such > an implementation. First it will allow any JCR implementation > to be CMIS compliant automatically (once the specification > is released ;) ) and allow us to find the issues to be fixed > in the specification itself and drive it into a good direction. That alone is a noble and worthwhile goal. I do believe that a wire protocol could be really useful to the CM world and, assuming that the TC sees the light and doesn't come up with a white elephant, I can see value in the ASF being the good steward of an implementation providing guidance, critique, feedback and continuous reality check to the spec writers. > Let me know what you think. FWIW, I would applaud at that effort and would be following it closely. Happy to help, if help is needed! Thanks, -- Gianugo Rabellino M: +44 779 5364 932 / +39 389 44 26 846 Sourcesense - making sense of Open Source: http://www.sourcesense.com
