Dims [+1] On 12/15/05, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I have recently discovered, that Geronimo contains a collection of > J2EE clean room implementations. IMO, it would be better, if we > offered them to take the jaxmeapi sources and add them to their > collection. > > I see the following disadvantages: > > - Being no Geronimo committers, we could no longer maintain the > sources. But the API > is mandated to us by an external source (the JAXB SPEC) anyways, to which > the > Geronimo developers are bound as well. Besides, the API sources have been > exceptionally stable with only very few and minor changes in the > last two years. > - Introduced dependency from an external jar file. (Possibly even more, > because > some classes from jaxmeapi are already present in other Geronimo jar > files, for > example QName and XMLConstants. But this is the case for Java <= 1.4 only.) > However, we'd dropped the dependency from an internal jar file. > > On the other hand, we had the following advantages: > > - Smaller project, faster builds > - Better visibility for the jar file (a real lot of Apache projects > are still using JAXB > jar files, even if the API were sufficient) > - Some projects, which are dependent on JaxMe, are actually dependent on the > jaxmeapi.jar only. They would no longer be dependent from us. In other > words, > we'd reduce the pressure of fixing Gump problems. > > What do you think? > > Dims [] > Ias [] > Jochen [+1] > Nacho [] > Robert [] > > > > -- > Often it does seem a pity that Noah and his party did not miss the > boat. (Mark Twain) > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
-- Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
