On 3/7/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Thomas Dudziak wrote: > > > On 3/7/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> DbUtils and DBCP to db.apache.org sounds like a win to me; DBCP would > >> point back to Jakarta for a dependency on [pool], but that helps to > foster > >> intra-project involvement. > >> > >> Betwixt, Digester and JXPath strike me as a bit more to swallow and XML > >> might not want to taking such bites. You want to go ahead and ask them? > > > > Well, yes, JXPath migh be a bit much, but Digester and Betwixt IMO > > would fit nicely. > > And obviously the component developers should agree first whether they > > think this is a good idea. And if they are interested, I can ask the > > DB PMC if they agree, as well. > > I don't think there is any active maintenance for DbUtils, and I suspect > not for DBCP either. I've been meaning to do some work on DbUtils - but I > have a long list of those. > > > However, I have no direct connections to XML PMC, and since I'm not an > > comitter on Digester/Betwixt/JXPath, it would feel a bit strange to me > > (though I would if you want me to). > > Go ahead and propose each one (db and xml) separately on commons-dev. See > if anyone speaks up against it - I suspect you'll find that for > betwixt/jxpath/dbutils/dbcp there won't be a huge amount of talk, though > Struts uses digester (I think) and they might have an opinion (they're > well represented on commons-dev).
Yes, Struts uses Digester. It also uses BeanUtils, Chain, FileUpload, IO, Logging and Validator. I think this whole thing is putting the cart before the horse. You're in the process of destroying Commons, not just dismantling it, and for no good reason that I can see. The people involved with Digester should be the ones to initiate a discussion about whether or not they want to take Digester elsewhere. As it is, this is coming across more like "why don't you guys go away, somewhere far away, 'cos we think that's a good idea". Stephen's proposal for Jakarta Language Components came from "inside" that grouping. So should any other proposals for groupings or departures. With respect to departures in particular, there is a serious potential for losing community. For example, I keep tabs on a bunch of different Commons components, primarily because all of the discussions happen on communal lists. If Digester and DbUtils, for example, go to some other community where they also share lists, I am very unlikely to sign up for those lists just to keep tabs on those components. Maybe the developers will move, but how much of the community will go with them? -- Martin Cooper We're only going to end up with a Jakarta XML Components at this rate; > which would suck. The DB ones would either be in a Jakarta SQL Components > (suck) or a Jakarta Enterprise Components. The latter isn't so bad, but as > Geronimo shows - there's a lot in J2EE and I suspect that grouping would > balloon. > > Hen > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
