I'm glad to hear that you are fine with the things you described. :)
Just one thing - I have used same template for all code files (file
begins with author (my) name and licence, just like in Qi4j). If I
don't point out exactly which files are 'ported' from Qi4j, yet I say
in the NOTICE file that "on a file by file basis", wouldn't that
conflict? Since all files have my name as author, but then NOTICE says
that some unspecified files are copyrighted to some other people. Or
is that a common practice?
And yes, I do intend to make Slim-Qi4CS open-source. The more eyes
will see the code, the more bugs will be spotted, and the more new
ideas sprout. However, I want to at least get all the licencing issues
completely solved before I go public.
About EntityStores: concept of 'entity composite' is one of the things
I left out from Slim-Qi4CS core. There are two reasons for this:
First, I was not entirely happy with how entities were handled in
Qi4j, and indeed, the project I work in (okay, it *is* quite special
project) could not use them at all (numerous reasons, but I did try
really hard to make it work with Qi4j entities). Second reason is that
I had quite limited resources for this project, so entities and uow
and queries were the first to go from feature-list.
However, despite all this, I've designed the Slim-Qi4CS core so that
you could 'plug in' new composite modeltypes. Indeed, the Service,
Transient, and Value composite modeltypes are all utilizing this same
engine to implement their functionality. So, if there is some lad out
there with extra free time and motivation, I'm pretty sure
cross-platform entitystores are not really far from reality at all. :)
About the 1.4 vs 2.0 codebase. I started with 1.4 but as soon as 2.0
was in good shape, I used it to lookup "how things are done on Java
side" whenever needed. And for example, all functionality in
org.qi4j.core.io is available in C# via LINQ queries, which come with
the core libraries. Therefore I don't think the Java version codebase
should matter THAT much. But of course, I haven't checked it in detail
lately - I might be wrong. :)
Quoting Niclas Hedhman <[email protected]>:
This is my personal opinion, and I don't speak for other Copyright
owners, just mine;
Licensing;
*I* am fine with the following;
* In the NOTICE file, write something like; "This project contains
software originating in Qi4j (http://www.qi4j.org) that has been
ported from Java to C#. Copyright of Qi4j is held by individuals on a
file by file basis. Qi4j is licensed to Qi4CS under the Apache License
version 2.0 by its copyright owners".
*I* think it is fine if you don't point at exactly which files are
fully original and which ones are "ported".
*I* would be happy if you list the contributors to Qi4j whose work
have added to your project. *I* will not be upset if you don't.
Naming;
*I* am Ok with, and even encourage, the name. Shows clear lineage.
I would be *happy*, if it is open sourced and we can collaborate under
the same "organization", to increase visibility et cetera. IF we could
even manage to get to data compatibility for certain EntityStores
where there is cross-platform clients available, THAT would be
awesome. (Mind you, I don't like Microsoft products ;-) )
Question; Is this based on 1.4 or 2.0 codebase? It is dramatically different.
Cheers
Niclas
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/3xugrbk
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/6a2pl4j
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
_______________________________________________
qi4j-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
_______________________________________________
qi4j-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
