IMHO this vote is going to get really confusing. formally speaking, can a 
+1 to a vote titled 'Mapper framework in sandbox' really be counted 
towards a different vote?

can't we have a fresh vote on acceptance straight into the commons with a 
revised list of initial committers? (i can't propose the vote since i'm 
not clear who those people would be.)

- robert

On Thursday, January 17, 2002, at 08:49 AM, Rey Francois wrote:

> Sorry, I made a mistake in listing the previous votes. Below is the
> correction (switch a and b).
>
> a: mapper in commons sandbox
> b: mapper in commons
>
> Ted is +1 on b.
> Jason is +1 on b.
> Jeff is +1 on a, but that was before the suggestion of putting the mapper 
> in
> the commons directly. Jeff, could you please clarify your vote in terms of
> option a or b? Thanks.
>
> Fr.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rey Francois [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 17 January 2002 09:45
> To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List'
> Subject: RE: [Vote] Mapper framework in sandbox (was RE: Commons
> Validator Packaging/Content)
>
>
> I agree with this list of initial committers.
> Since it is proposed as a commons as well, I suggest to qualify your votes
> as follows:
>
> a: mapper in commons sandbox
> b: mapper in commons
>
> Ted is +1 on a.
> Jason is +1 on a.
> Jeff is +1 on b, but that was before the suggestion of putting the mapper 
> in
> the commons directly. Jeff, could you please clarify your vote in terms of
> option a or b? Thanks.
>
> I of course plan to "standardize" the build process and align with the
> Jakarta template, repackage, and test this before submission.
>
> Fr.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Sanders [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 16 January 2002 19:34
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: RE: [Vote] Mapper framework in sandbox (was RE: Commons
> Validator Packaging/Content)
>
>
> So the initial set of comitters needs to be updated to be:
>
> Rey?
> Ted?
> Dave?
> Craig?
>
> Just wondering, as that piece of the proposal is not here.
>
> Scott
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 9:48 AM
>> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
>> Subject: Re: [Vote] Mapper framework in sandbox (was RE:
>> Commons Validator Packaging/Content)
>>
>>
>> +1 as a Commons package.
>>
>> Rey's a longtime contributor to the Struts lists, and his
>> Mapping framework is often mentioned by the Struts
>> developers. Rey's also made some important contributions to
>> the Digester package. As he mentioned elsewhere, this package
>> complementary to the Commons Validator, and I believe some
>> people use both in the same application.
>>
>> I think both the Mapping framework and Rey himself would both
>> be worthy denizens of the Commons.
>>
>> But, I don't believe it needs to go into the sandbox first.
>> The package has been "out there" and available for download
>> with full source for some time, and there is a developer
>> community already using it.
>>
>> -Ted.
>>
>>
>> Rey Francois wrote:
>>>
>>> I've sent this post yesterday but I'm pretty sure it will
>> quickly fade
>>> under the abyss of all the posts on this list. So I post my
>> proposal
>>> again, using a more appropriate title, and using the recommended
>>> format:
>>>
>>> Proposal for a mapper framework
>>>
>>> (0) rationale
>>>
>>> In many application environments validation needs to be
>> performed on
>>> data fields, data is converted from one form to another,
>> and is being
>>> transferred from one object to another. A typical example
>> is found in
>>> graphical user interfaces that validate user input, convert it to a
>>> proper form, and send it to a server application for processing. In
>>> the case of HTML front-ends, the HTTP protocol forces user
>> input to be
>>> sent as text data to the server where the validation and conversion
>>> has to be performed.
>>>
>>> Most of the time implementing such validation and
>> conversion requires
>>> lots of custom code: get the data element, validate it, convert it,
>>> and put the result into another object. In a small
>> application, this
>>> may not be an issue. However in medium to large
>> applications with many
>>> different data elements, such coding becomes a tedious and
>> error-prone
>>> task.
>>>
>>> In such situation developers tend to achieve some form of reuse in
>>> order to reduce the menial work. At the lowest level is the
>>> cut'n'paste approach. A better approach is the definition of some
>>> high-level abstraction which encapsulate reusable logic: validation
>>> and conversion classes are typical abstractions found in
>> most systems.
>>>
>>> However, even with validation and conversion logic being reusable,
>>> some custom coding is still required in order to attach those
>>> validations and conversions to the data elements. To avoid
>> completely
>>> the custom code, an even higher level of abstraction is needed in
>>> order to model such bindings. The mapper framework
>> implemented in this
>>> package provides such high-level abstractions, making the
>> validation,
>>> conversion, and transfer of data a process driven by a
>> configuration
>>> file.
>>>
>>> Although the central concept in this framework is the one
>> of a mapper,
>>> the framework is flexible enough to be used only for
>> validating fields
>>> of an object, or converting an object into another one, or simply
>>> copying fields from one object to another. It is also
>> flexible enough
>>> so that validation, conversion, and transfer can be performed on
>>> multiple objects within the same mapper.
>>>
>>> (1) scope of the package
>>>
>>> The mapper framework provides the necessary classes and
>> abstractions
>>> to perform validation, conversion, and transfer of data
>> fields between
>>> any types of objects. The configuration of all mappers and other
>>> abstractions is done in one or more XML file loaded at startup. The
>>> framework does not depend on any other application
>> framework such as
>>> Struts or Turbine, and integration with such frameworks should be
>>> provided separately.
>>>
>>> (1.5) interaction with other packages
>>>
>>> The mapper framework makes use of
>>>  - the Commons Digester
>>>  - the Commons BeanUtils
>>>  - JavaCC
>>>  - the Commons Pool (work in progress)
>>>
>>> (2) identify the initial source for the package
>>>
>>> The initial codebase is to be contributed by Francois Rey.
>> A version
>>> of the source is already available at <
>>> http://husted.com/struts/resources/mapper.htm >.
>>>
>>> (2.1) identify the base name for the package
>>>
>>> org.apache.commons.mapper
>>> org.apache.commons.mapper.parser
>>>
>>> (3) identify any Jakarta-Commons resources to be created
>>>
>>> (3.1) mailing list
>>>
>>> Until traffic justifies, the package will use the
>> Jakarta-Commons list
>>> for communications.
>>>
>>> (3.2) CVS repositories
>>>
>>> For the time being, the package will reside in a sub-project of the
>>> Jakarta-Commons sandbox CVS.
>>>
>>> (3.3) Bugzilla
>>>
>>> The package should be listed as a component of under the
>>> Jakarta-Commons Bugzilla entry.
>>>
>>> (3.4) Jyve FAQ (when available)
>>>
>>> commons-mapper
>>>
>>> (4) identify the initial set of committers to be listed in
>> the Status
>>> File.
>>>
>>>  Francois Rey
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Rey Francois [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>> Sent: 14 January 2002 13:40
>>> To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List'
>>> Subject: RE: Commons Validator Packaging/Content
>>>
>>> This Intake component is quite interesting. If I had known of its
>>> existence about half a year ago I may have inspired myself or even
>>> reused it instead of developing my own
>> validation/conversion/mapping
>>> framework.
>>>
>>> In any case, I now have this framework that I think is
>> quite relevant
>>> to all these discussions in the commons list. I've already
>> "published"
>>> the mapper framework on Ted Husted's resource site (see
>>> http://husted.com/struts/resources/mapper.htm) and some of you may
>>> remember a few postings about it.
>>>
>>> Because I see so much discussion about a validation
>> framework, about
>>> Intake, and competing implementations in the sandbox, I'm also
>>> starting to itch: I'd like to put this mapper framework in
>> the sandbox
>>> so that more people can see it and judge it. Let me give a
>> few bullet
>>> points about it:
>>> - it's a validate/convert/transfer framework: it can take
>> values from one
>>> object, validate/convert them, and transfer the resulting
>> values into
>>> another object
>>> - it can do all this or just a little (e.g. just
>> validation) very easily, in
>>> one go or step by step (e.g. step1: validate; step2: convert; step3:
>>> transfer; with user control between each step).
>>> - XML configuration: mappers, mappings, converters,
>> validators, validation
>>> rules, getters & setters, etc. are defined in one or more
>> XML config file.
>>> - it is HTTP and Struts independent: it only depends on the
>> PropertyUtils,
>>> Digester, JavaCC, JUnit, ...
>>> - it is used in production within a Struts web application:
>> it handles all
>>> form validation, all backend request population, and all
>> mappings of backend
>>> results to presentation beans.
>>> - more info and download on
>> http://husted.com/struts/resources/mapper.htm,
>>> and in the included HTML file.
>>>
>>> This framework IMHO is of good quality, but I never bothered
>>> "promoting" it by creating a web site for it. Since it was made
>>> downloadable from Ted's site, I received a few mails, both
>> on the list
>>> and personally, from people using this framework asking me
>> questions.
>>> So it is used out there, but it's usage is very limited compared to
>>> David's validator component.
>>>
>>> Making it available in the sandbox would make it more
>> visible, would
>>> allow others to participate in its evolution, and would
>> also provide a
>>> "healthy" competition to the validation framework business.
>>>
>>> Anybody out there supporting the submission of this mapper
>> framework
>>> in the sandbox?
>>>
>>> Fr.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>> Sent: 07 January 2002 02:42
>>> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
>>> Subject: Re: Commons Validator Packaging/Content
>>>
>>> Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
>>>> That is my question. Why doesn't David work towards integrating
>>>> Intake
>>> into
>>>> Struts instead of working on pulling what is duplicated
>> from Struts
>>>> out
>>> into
>>>> Commons? The answer is simple...it is David's itch to
>> scratch and it
>>>> is
>>> the
>>>> simplest thing for him to do. That is the current failure
>> of Jakarta
>>>> in my eyes. Jakarta has become no better than
>> Sourceforge. It is a
>>>> place where
>>> you
>>>> can dump your least common denominator.
>>>>
>>>> Instead of Struts working to use Turbine code and then
>> move it into
>>> Commons.
>>>> Struts came up with their own validation framework, made
>> it stable
>>>> in
>>> Struts
>>>> land and is now dumping it into Commons. There is a
>> complete lack of
>>>> communication there.
>>>
>>> Yes, we recognized that last year, and so created the
>> Commons. At that
>>> time, David's framework already existed. Learning the lessons of
>>> Turbine, we decided not to integrate into Struts, and left it as a
>>> free-standing component. (It was created that way from the
>> beginning.)
>>>
>>> David has already done the work. At this point, the duplication of
>>> effort would be making Intake a free standing component. If someone
>>> wants to do that, and donate it to the Commons, I think
>> that would be
>>> great,  especially since the Commons specifically provides for
>>> competiting implementations.
>>>
>>> -- Ted Husted, Husted dot Com, Fairport NY USA.
>>> -- Building Java web applications with Struts.
>>> -- Tel +1 585 737-3463.
>>> -- Web http://www.husted.com/struts/
>>>
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>
>>>
>> **********************************************************************
>>> **
>>> The information in this email is confidential and is intended solely
>>> for the addressee(s).
>>> Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not
>>> an intended recipient, please notify the sender of this email
>>> immediately. You should not copy, use or disseminate the
>>> information contained in the email.
>>> Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
>>> sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be
>>> the views of Capco.
>>>
>>> http://www.capco.com
>>>
>> **********************************************************************
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>> **********************************************************************
>>> **
>>> The information in this email is confidential and is intended solely
>>> for the addressee(s).
>>> Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not
>>> an intended recipient, please notify the sender of this email
>>> immediately. You should not copy, use or disseminate the
>>> information contained in the email.
>>> Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
>>> sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be
>>> the views of Capco.
>>>
>>> http://www.capco.com
>>>
>> **********************************************************************
>>> *
>>>
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> <mailto:commons-dev-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> --
>> To
>> unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>  <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ************************************************************************
> The information in this email is confidential and is intended solely
> for the addressee(s).
> Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not
> an intended recipient, please notify the sender of this email
> immediately. You should not copy, use or disseminate the
> information contained in the email.
> Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
> sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be
> the views of Capco.
>
> http://www.capco.com
> ***********************************************************************
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ************************************************************************
> The information in this email is confidential and is intended solely
> for the addressee(s).
> Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not
> an intended recipient, please notify the sender of this email
> immediately. You should not copy, use or disseminate the
> information contained in the email.
> Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
> sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be
> the views of Capco.
>
> http://www.capco.com
> ***********************************************************************
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED].
> org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED].
> org>
>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to