I think ojb can do things like map a set of related objects to xml as well. Its not completely database centered. (I know very little about ojb, so feel free to dispute that. Just thought I would bring it up in case those that know better, are tuned out.)
john mcnally On Thu, 2002-05-02 at 15:33, Peter Donald wrote: > Hi, > > OJB deserves to be a peer to other projects alongside ant, avalon, struts etc > > A somewhat better idea IMO would be to use OJB + Torque as a trampoline for a > new top-level project "db.apache.org" (or insert something more snappy if you > want). So much like xml.apache.org deals with XML, db.apache.org will deal > with databases (maybe even collaborate with xml.apache.org/xindice in > future). > > While this new db project is gestating we can cross link it extensively from > the jakarta website. After they get off the feet we talk to it the same way > we talk to xml.apache.org ? > > On Fri, 3 May 2002 07:33, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > I hate to interrupt all the good fun over standards, bike sheds, and > > general good community feelings, but I would like to solicit community > > opinion on something unrelated to DVSL or Jon Stevens (both of which I > > like, btw...) > > > > Recently, it was proposed that ObjectBridge be brought to Jakarta as a > > subproject. > > > > Costin suggested, and I supported, that a subproject of wider scope be > > created to allow the collection of similar technologies into one larger > > subcommunity (that isn't an exact quote, but I think he'll agree in general > > with that.) > > > > The idea would be to bring in ObjectBridge, but create a Commons-like > > environment in which other projects can be brought. Call it DB-Commons as > > a working name. > > > > There are some good reasons, including community alignment, inter-project > > synergy (there, I used the word in an Apache-related post), and ease of > > discovery for new users and developers. > > > > Off the top of my head, in Jakarta we have lots of db related tools already > > (Torque, commons-dbcp, and I am sure others...), and having a db-focused > > subproject in which they can be brought to with a lower barrier than > > 'fullsubproject' might be very benficial. > > > > We already have the successful Commons model to use as a starting point. > > > > Anyone have any comments? > > -- > Cheers, > > Peter Donald > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
