(Pasting DJencks reply from the other thread) On Feb 12, 2008 2:03 AM, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My understanding is that jaxb is included in the jre starting with java 6. IMO this is one of the arguments in its favor. We also can't avoid it at this point. Openejb deployment is very tied to jaxb and the geronimo startup code also relies on it. I don't think rewriting the openejb deployment system using xmlbeans is plausible. thanks david jencks On Feb 12, 2008 2:12 AM, Shiva Kumar H R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > (Pasting Donald's reply from the original thread) > > On Feb 11, 2008 9:33 PM, Donald Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > We need to discuss introducing more dependencies on JAXB as a group > > first, as this just ties more of our server code with Sun RI, which has > > no alternative implementation right now (and could be licensed from Sun > > as GPL in future releases....) > > > > > On Feb 11, 2008 8:46 PM, Shiva Kumar H R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I went through following tutorials of JAXB & XMLBeans: > > a) Java Architecture for XML Binding (JAXB) > > http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/WebServices/jaxb/ > > b) Tutorial: First Steps with XMLBeans > > http://xmlbeans.apache.org/documentation/tutorial_getstarted.html > > > > Also searched for comparisons btw them. Latest one I could find is the > > following blog from Jan'2005: http://technology.amis.nl/blog/?p=321 > > > > I am yet to see the value add JAXB brings over XMLBeans. Am I missing > > something? > > > > > > On Feb 11, 2008 4:44 PM, Shiva Kumar H R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Despite my liking for xmlbeans and its unique strengths I think a > > > > very strong argument can be made for moving the deployer code to jaxb. > > > > > > > Interesting!! Let me do some quick learning of jaxb and start a > > > separate thread on this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks > > > > david jencks > > > > > > > > On Feb 8, 2008, at 12:30 AM, Shiva Kumar H R wrote: > > > > > > > > 2) Geronimo Eclipse Plug-in (GEP): > > > > a) Model framework for Geronimo deployment plans: > > > > Currently it is EMF (Eclipse Modeling Framework). With every update > > > > to Geronimo deployment schema, it's a major pain to generate new EMF > > > > classes. If however, GEP uses the same model framework as that of > > > > Geronimo > > > > server (XMLBeans), then at least this problem would be solved. IIUC > > > > JSR-88 > > > > DConfigBeans would be the ideal model framework for GEP - in that case > > > > even > > > > if the model framework of server changes in future, GEP would be > > > > unaffected. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Thanks, > > > > Shiva > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Thanks, > > > Shiva > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > Shiva > > >
