+ 1 Deepal > +1. > > Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> Team, >> >> Can we please VOTE in Benson as a ws committer, given the track record >> and the need going forward. >> >> thanks, >> dims >> >> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Benson Margulies >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> The CXF project is highly dependent on XmlSchema. So much so that we, >>> collectively, and I, individually, are willing to apply some >>> significant effort to it. >>> >>> While we run into point issues from time to time, we would really like >>> to see a version of XmlSchema that has some significant overall >>> modifications that are not really suitable to patches submitted on >>> JIRA entries. >>> >>> Some of these are: >>> >>> 1) Move to Java 5 and use Generics to reduce the cast burden. >>> 2) Improve performance. >>> 3) Make the API more friendly to building schema from scratch. It's >>> not like it's impossible, but there are a number of areas involving >>> schema collections where the current situation leads us to slow and >>> clumsy code. >>> 4) Move the class model closer to the abstract data model of XmlSchema >>> and further away from just representing the surface form of the XML >>> representation. In particular, make it harder to create invalid >>> schemata from the API. >>> >>> Just for experimental purposes, I made a branch of the current >>> XmlSchema trunk in the CXF sandbox >>> (https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cxf/sandbox/benson/xmlschema/XmlSchema) >>> >>> and did a first pass at the first half of 'step 1' above. Any readers >>> of this can co that tree and look around at my work and criticize it. >>> (At CXF, we allow any committer from any other project to commit in >>> our sandbox, which aids us in inter-project integrations.) >>> >>> I would be happy to move this effort to a similiar sandbox in the >>> XmlSchema universe. >>> >>> I would be happy to wake up and discover myself a committer over here, >>> as well, and just do this work in a branch for the purpose. That would >>> allow this work to be just another fully visible activity of >>> WSCOMMONS, and perhaps that would attract some other contributors. >>> >>> While campaigning for committer-hood is generally bad form, I would >>> submit for your consideration: >>> >>> WSCOMMONS-369 (pending patch) >>> WSCOMMONS-272 (applied patch) >>> WSCOMMONS-270 (applied patch) >>> >>> and some ancient discussion on the list, I think. >>> >> >> >> > >
-- Thank you! http://blogs.deepal.org
