On 9/1/06, Nicolas Modrzyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I had a look at Graffito before, and while it looked promising the
site hasn't been updated since february, and no activity has been
recorded for a while now (5 weeks ago the license header was updated).
Does anyone knows what the status of the project is ?
If the project is still moving then yes, this is a great move to do.
Nicolas,
The OCM haven't moved too much lately, mainly because of 2 reasons:
- the core 2 developers (Christopher and myself) have been quite busy
(sometimes it happens)
- the tool has already reached a good enough state (I am using it on
InfoQ.com authoring tool).
hth,
./alex
--
:Architect of InfoQ.com:
.w( the_mindstorm )p.
On Sep 1, 2006, at 5:50 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The incubating Graffito project
> (http://incubator.apache.org/graffito/) is building a nice
> portlet-based content management framework. One of the design goals is
> to be independent of the underlying storage model using mapping tools
> to present a pure Java object model to higher level components.
> Graffito is currently is using Apache OJB to achieve this on top of
> relational databases, but they also want to support JCR content
> repositories as storage components. To achieve this they've already
> created a relatively complete object-content mapping (ocm) tool called
> Graffito JCR Mapping
> (http://incubator.apache.org/graffito/jcr-mapping/).
>
> There was recent discussion on the Graffito mailing lists about the
> ocm tool being ptoentially useful to other people as well, and that
> being a Graffito subproject probably doesn't give the tool enough
> visibility among JCR users. One idea would be to graduate the Graffito
> JCR Mapping subproject into a Jackrabbit subproject to get greater
> exposure. The initial response within the Graffito community was
> positive to this idea, so I'd like to ask for opinions also from the
> Jackrabbit community. Would you think that bringing in the ocm tool
> would be a good addition to the set on-top-of-JCR components we
> already have?
>
> There are a number of stakeholders to consider and practical issues to
> sort out to actually make the idea happen, but I can start taking care
> of those if there is general consensus that this would be a good move.
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
> --
> Yukatan - http://yukatan.fi/ - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Software craftsmanship, JCR consulting, and Java development
