+1 with my note that this movement is focused on JAXB 1.0 for now.
I have to admit that I've spent quite much time considering the
proposal.
Happy new year,
Ias
On Dec 15, 2005, at 9:45 PM, Jochen Wiedmann 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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
