Hey Jukka,
let's discuss some of the technical areas how to continue.
Would it at least make sense for the projects to share a common
org.apache.cmis package with with things like constants defined in the
CMIS standard and other basic concepts that everyone can agree with?
Definitely there
On Dec 11, 2009, at 5:28 PM, Jens Hübel wrote:
All I am saying is just be open
Being open is OK, but having a separate project in incubator is just confusing.
I'm all for
1) accepting the code under the Chemistry tree as an alternative client
implementation
2) trying to see if the two
,
December 11, 2009 7:46 PM
To: chemistry-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Incubator-General
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] OpenCMIS incubator for Content Mangement
Interoperability Services (CMIS)
On Dec 11, 2009, at 7:10 PM, Florian Müller wrote:
Chemistry uses Abdera to communicate with the server
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Stefane Fermigier s...@nuxeo.com wrote:
OK, I personally believe this is in contradiction with the first commandment
of the Apache Way:
*Community over Code* is a frequent saying that exemplifies ASF projects.
Community uses Openness and Merit, expressed
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Michael Wechner
michael.wech...@wyona.com wrote:
Right and as long as OpenCMIS fulfills the requirements of the incubator I
don't see any reason why there shouldn't be two projects of the same topic.
I also do not see any reason why OpenCMIS should be a
- Original Message
From: Florent Guillaume f...@nuxeo.com
To: gene...@incubator.apache.org
Cc: chemistry-dev@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Sat, December 12, 2009 10:35:18 AM
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] OpenCMIS incubator for Content Mangement
Interoperability Services (CMIS)
On Fri
Florent Guillaume wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Michael Wechner
michael.wech...@wyona.com wrote:
Right and as long as OpenCMIS fulfills the requirements of the incubator I
don't see any reason why there shouldn't be two projects of the same topic.
I also do not see any reason why
On Dec 10, 2009, at 4:00 PM, Florent Guillaume wrote:
My earlier recommendation to Paul and Florian, and my recommendation
today, is that, if incubating is deemed the better choice, OpenCMIS
become a top level directory under the Chemistry codebase. The earlier
the two codebases are brought
Same for me (if I understand your opinion correctly): we shouldn't
have OpenCMIS competing with a subproject of Chemistry, because it
will have a negative impact both internally (on project developers)
and externally (on project customers):
1. Internally: duplication of effort, instead of
Message-
From: Stefane Fermigier [mailto:s...@nuxeo.com]
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 3:52 PM
To: chemistry-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Incubator-General
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] OpenCMIS incubator for Content Mangement
Interoperability Services (CMIS)
Same for me (if I understand your
On Dec 11, 2009, at 4:44 PM, Florian Müller wrote:
Hi Stefane,
I'm not sure I get your point. If OpenCMIS would become a top level
subproject within Chemistry (which is what Florent suggested) then
those two topics would still remain. It would be even worse:
Chemistry would then have
Hi Chemistry,
I understand the concerns you might have and the confusion we have caused. But
please do not forget that Open in Open Source has a meaning. So I am not sure
that all the comments I read here are in accordance with the idea of it. So
before you just say No please think about
- If
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
I compared opencmis-provider-api to chemistry-api. While there are
differences in design (granularity of interfaces, type safety, etc.),
the fundamental architecture is the same for both projects. This is as
expected
On Dec 11, 2009, at 5:28 PM, Jens Hübel wrote:
Hi Chemistry,
I understand the concerns you might have and the confusion we have
caused. But please do not forget that Open in Open Source has a
meaning. So I am not sure that all the comments I read here are in
accordance with the idea of
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Stefane Fermigier s...@nuxeo.com wrote:
...More seriously, let's not attack each other's conception of open source,
and
focus on the question at hand
+1
...Everyone, member of the open source community or not, is free to start a
new
implementation of
: [PROPOSAL] OpenCMIS incubator for Content Mangement
Interoperability Services (CMIS)
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Florian Müller fmuel...@opentext.com wrote:
The only way to overcome this is to merge the OpenCMIS code into the
Chemistry code base. But the technical approaches
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 7:10 PM, Florian Müller fmuel...@opentext.com wrote:
But you are actually comparing two different levels of APIs. The
opencmis-provider-api handles simple immutable data objects while
chemistry-api follows an object-oriented approach. As far as I know Chemistry
has
On Dec 11, 2009, at 7:10 PM, Florian Müller wrote:
Chemistry uses Abdera to communicate with the server while OpenCMIS
is based on JAX-B and some CMIS specific XML coding.
I've been personally asking myself recently wether it would be
feasible to drop Abdera in favor of JAXB in
Hi Jukka,
It's a
bit unfortunate that we now have two codebases for pretty much the
same thing, but I guess we just have to live with that for now. In
fact some healthy competition may even be good for both projects.
There is no doubt that life would have been easier for all of us if all
any current rule of the incubator?
Cheers
Michael
Florian
-Original Message-
From: Stefane Fermigier [mailto:s...@nuxeo.com]
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 7:46 PM
To: chemistry-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Incubator-General
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] OpenCMIS incubator for Content
I find this proposal very strange.
Doesn't Chemistry already provide a client library ? What's the
problem with it ?
S.
On Dec 9, 2009, at 8:56 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
Hi,
For those who're not following gene...@incubator.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
-- Forwarded message --
21 matches
Mail list logo
