Hi, I would prefer c) but keeping the package names and only change the artifact groupid, to keep it's proprietary usage for POI. So we don't need to care to build up a xmlbeans community again.
I think d) is a longterm goal - to simulate xmlbeans xml infoset preservation plus support various ECMA versions plus handling alternate content blocks correctly will be a challenge in a brown field context. Therefore we should first fix xmlbeans. Andi On 11/9/17 10:01 PM, Dominik Stadler wrote: > Hi, > > the initial discussion showed a few possible routes. I would like to > discuss the options a bit more, probably followed by a vote to see which > option has the majority. > > I currently see the following possibilities: > > a) Fork XMLBeans with a different name outside of Apache and upload a fixed > version, just like PJ already did, only some more renaming would probably > be necessary > > b) Include the source of XMLBeans with POI and release fixes from there > > c) As b), but change the code so different package names and jar-names are > used to avoid colliding with the "official" version > > d) Do nothing with XMLBeans and invest all the time for replacing XMLBeans > soon > > Any thoughts? Other options? > > Thanks... Dominik. >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
