Hi Steve! thanks a lot for moving things forward, very appreciated and I personally thank you.
Sorry for the late reply - unfortunately my OSS involvement decreased in the last months due to my new job, I hope to get better organised soon, in order to get back contributing ASAP. Exploring your points: > > - Support for same features of 1.x > > this comes, fortunately, for free: Chain2 is not a complete redesign of Chain, but rather a restyle > > - Increased modularisation > > Goal achieved - we no longer have a god module, but everything is splitted in small submodules, i.e. APIs, core, web, ... functionalities are distributed in separated bundles > > - Use of generics > > Done, I think we have found the definitive design - that doesn't mean this is a closed chapter, feel free to dig in the source code and fill an issue if you want to propose an improvement > > - A Fluent API (EDSL) > > This is achieved via a single class, but agreed that needs anyway to be better advertised > > - Web support > > Inherited from older Chain releases > > - Increase number of supported formats for external chain > configuration (add JSON, YAML etc.. to the current support for XML) > > As things stand, all of the above have been implemented apart from the > support for additional files formats (defined in CHAIN-76), although more > testing and samples are required. > and, as you already noticed, this is still a TODO :) > Christians links point to an interesting, if very specific use of chains : > XChain fuses the commons-chain and JXPath projects, and there may be merit > in the creation of a module/component to accommodate this in chains. > Whether this should be in a 2.0 release needs to be discussed, > I am not sure that feature would fit in the commons component, however if Christian is submitting a patch that contributes that functionalities in commons-chain, I am open to apply it > however, I would favour the following happening with Chain: > > 1. Move CHAIN-76 to another release (2.1?) – I am not aware of any > great demand for this functionality > 2. Make a 2.0 release candidate of the SVN trunk as is and move > towards a substantial test phase. > > That makes perfectly sense, I second you - just give me the time to have a deep review to the codebase, so I can cut the first RC. > > > This would have the merit of ensuring much of the recent great work from > Simone and others goes out into the wider world and hopefully kick-starts > interest in commons-chain. Of course, if the response is minimal, then > perhaps we should reduce effort in commons-chain as is, although this is a > wider community decision. > > Look forward to hearing opinions on this. > > Regards, > > Steve Westwood > Thanks a lot for participating, have a nice day, all the best! -Simo http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ http://twitter.com/simonetripodi http://www.99soft.org/ http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ http://twitter.com/simonetripodi http://www.99soft.org/ On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Steve Westwood < steve.westw...@hexsaw.org.uk> wrote: > ** > > Christian Trimble recently sent to the list details of the XChain project > (see http://xiantrimble.com/xchain/ and https://github.com/ctrimble/xchain) > and pondered on whether aspects of this could be accommodated in > commons-chain. There has not been any response to this email (apologies to > Christian), but it does raise an interesting question about where does the > wider community want commons-chain to go. > > Simone Tripodi summarised his view of the 2.0 release recently, with it > consisting of: > > - Support for same features of 1.x > - Increased modularisation > - Use of generics > - A Fluent API (EDSL) > - Web support > - Increase number of supported formats for external chain > configuration (add JSON, YAML etc.. to the current support for XML) > > As things stand, all of the above have been implemented apart from the > support for additional files formats (defined in CHAIN-76), although more > testing and samples are required. > > Christians links point to an interesting, if very specific use of chains : > XChain fuses the commons-chain and JXPath projects, and there may be merit > in the creation of a module/component to accommodate this in chains. > Whether this should be in a 2.0 release needs to be discussed, however, I > would favour the following happening with Chain: > > 1. Move CHAIN-76 to another release (2.1?) – I am not aware of any > great demand for this functionality > 2. Make a 2.0 release candidate of the SVN trunk as is and move > towards a substantial test phase. > > This would have the merit of ensuring much of the recent great work from > Simone and others goes out into the wider world and hopefully kick-starts > interest in commons-chain. Of course, if the response is minimal, then > perhaps we should reduce effort in commons-chain as is, although this is a > wider community decision. > > Look forward to hearing opinions on this. > > Regards, > > Steve Westwood >