Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
On 8/18/07, Oleg Kalnichevski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 2007-08-18 at 13:40 +0200, Roland Weber wrote: Disassociation from the server side. What is the benefit of that? At any rate in my opinion it is not worth trouble of rebranding the whole project. Will the current [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing lists continue to exist alongside [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED], where the Slide WebDAV client finds a new home? Yes, as aliases. I think it is a standard practice. But it is a detail when can take care of in the normal course of things. Living on the same mailing list is the best option. Otherwise you just end up with yet more fragmented communities. Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
Oleg Kalnichevski wrote: Will the current [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing lists continue to exist alongside [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED], where the Slide WebDAV client finds a new home? Yes, as aliases. Then server-related discussions would end up on the mailing lists of the new project. There is still some discussion going on, and it is not focused on the WebDAV client afaik. If the new project is not taking over the whole Slide codebase, it shouldn't take over the existing mailing lists either. I don't consider that decision as something we can care about later. We might end up doing that if Slide is officially declared dormant/unsupported, but so far the participation in this discussion is clearly insufficient for such a step. Besides, I see the new project as a potential home for more than just HttpComponents and the Slide WebDAV client. For the moment, I can think of the following: - HttpComponents - Multipart Request Entity (not HTTP, but required for WebDAV) - WebDAV - CalDAV (extension to WebDAV) - not-yet-commons-ssl (HTTPS) Anyway, with just the two of us sharing our views, this discussion is moot. Allowing 7 days for a vote and 3 days in advance for a board meeting agenda, we're already too late to make it to the board meeting on Aug 29. The next scheduled meeting after that is on Sep 19. With all due respect to Oliver, if we don't see significantly more (diverse) input from the Slide side until early September, I would prefer to send HttpComponents TLP on it's own. The WebDAV client could still join when things for Slide are sorted out here at Jakarta. cheers, Roland - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
On Sat, 2007-08-18 at 09:25 +0200, Roland Weber wrote: Oleg Kalnichevski wrote: Could you live with HttpComponents being the name of the new TLP? I would really like to avoid having to come up with a completely new name for the project. HttpComponents use the package org.apache.http. I would prefer something abstract as the home for non-HTTP code such as WebDAV or multipart. How do we do that without a project name to use as the package name? (org.apache.httpcomponents is not an improvement over org.apache.http ;-) What's wrong with org.apache.slide for WebDAV components? Oleg cheers, Roland - 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]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:
What's wrong with org.apache.slide for WebDAV components?
If we're not taking over the full Slide codebase,
and if Slide\{WebDAV-client} is not officially
declared dormant in Jakarta, then we'd have two
independent projects using the same namespace.
Since a WebDAV client based on the 4.0 HttpClient
will be incompatible, it's also a question whether
the same package names should be used. That will
create name clashes in applications that for some
reason - for example during migration - have to
use both old and new packages.
While Martin mentioned in the June board report [1]
that he would like to keep the Slide codebase in
one piece, the current state of the discussion tends
towards carving out the WebDAV client only. In that
case, I wonder whether we should position the new
component as a successor to Slide at all.
cheers,
Roland
[1] http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/JakartaBoardReport-June2007
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
On Sat, 2007-08-18 at 11:49 +0200, Roland Weber wrote:
Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:
What's wrong with org.apache.slide for WebDAV components?
If we're not taking over the full Slide codebase,
and if Slide\{WebDAV-client} is not officially
declared dormant in Jakarta, then we'd have two
independent projects using the same namespace.
Since a WebDAV client based on the 4.0 HttpClient
will be incompatible, it's also a question whether
the same package names should be used. That will
create name clashes in applications that for some
reason - for example during migration - have to
use both old and new packages.
While Martin mentioned in the June board report [1]
that he would like to keep the Slide codebase in
one piece, the current state of the discussion tends
towards carving out the WebDAV client only. In that
case, I wonder whether we should position the new
component as a successor to Slide at all.
If there are no plans to develop non-client bits any further, I
personally think WebDAV client should keep Slide as its name. Slide is a
well established brand and I see no benefit in discarding it and coming
up with some new fancy name.
Oleg
cheers,
Roland
[1] http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/JakartaBoardReport-June2007
-
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]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
Oleg Kalnichevski wrote: If there are no plans to develop non-client bits any further, That exactly is my concern. I still hope for some more input from Slide developers. I personally think WebDAV client should keep Slide as its name. I could live with that. Slide is a well established brand As a server component that happens to have a little client-side WebDAV library as an add-on. and I see no benefit in discarding it Disassociation from the server side. cheers, Roland - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
On Sat, 2007-08-18 at 12:21 +0200, Roland Weber wrote: Oleg Kalnichevski wrote: If there are no plans to develop non-client bits any further, That exactly is my concern. I still hope for some more input from Slide developers. I personally think WebDAV client should keep Slide as its name. I could live with that. Slide is a well established brand As a server component that happens to have a little client-side WebDAV library as an add-on. and I see no benefit in discarding it Disassociation from the server side. What is the benefit of that? At any rate in my opinion it is not worth trouble of rebranding the whole project. Oleg cheers, Roland - 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]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
Disassociation from the server side. What is the benefit of that? At any rate in my opinion it is not worth trouble of rebranding the whole project. Will the current [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing lists continue to exist alongside [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED], where the Slide WebDAV client finds a new home? That would be bound to confuse users. cheers, Roland - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
On Sat, 2007-08-18 at 13:40 +0200, Roland Weber wrote: Disassociation from the server side. What is the benefit of that? At any rate in my opinion it is not worth trouble of rebranding the whole project. Will the current [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing lists continue to exist alongside [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED], where the Slide WebDAV client finds a new home? Yes, as aliases. I think it is a standard practice. But it is a detail when can take care of in the normal course of things. Oleg That would be bound to confuse users. cheers, Roland - 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]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
Oliver Zeigermann wrote: 2007/8/10, Roland Weber [EMAIL PROTECTED]: While I would like to get rid of HttpClient 3.x rather sooner than later, there's no denyig that it will stay with us for several years to come. From this angle, it would make sense to move the WebDAV client as it is. Maybe that could be the first step. If there is a reasonable interest of developers to help support the 3.x based WebDAV client, I am in favor of cutting it out. I hope that this discussion will heat up a bit next week. (while I'm away...) Let's see if there is... Leaving the server-side code of Slide in Jakarta will surely give the new project a better start. That code would be a huge burden on my mind, and probably not mine alone. Right. Oliver Hi Oliver Could you live with HttpComponents being the name of the new TLP? I would really like to avoid having to come up with a completely new name for the project. The name is ugly and unwieldy but we have already had a number of public releases so it is more or less established. If yes, consider adding your name to the TLP proposal draft below [1] and I'll go ahead and add a clause about WebDAV client based on Slide codebase to the project scope. Cheers Oleg [1] http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-httpclient/ApacheHttpComponentsTlpProposalDraft - 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]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
Could you live with HttpComponents being the name of the new TLP? I would really like to avoid having to come up with a completely new name for the project. The name is ugly and unwieldy but we have already had a number of public releases so it is more or less established. If yes, consider adding your name to the TLP proposal draft below [1] and I'll go ahead and add a clause about WebDAV client based on Slide codebase to the project scope. Fine with me. Name added. Cheers Oliver - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
While I would like to get rid of HttpClient 3.x rather sooner than later, there's no denyig that it will stay with us for several years to come. From this angle, it would make sense to move the WebDAV client as it is. Maybe that could be the first step. If there is a reasonable interest of developers to help support the 3.x based WebDAV client, I am in favor of cutting it out. I hope that this discussion will heat up a bit next week. (while I'm away...) Leaving the server-side code of Slide in Jakarta will surely give the new project a better start. That code would be a huge burden on my mind, and probably not mine alone. cheers, Roland - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
2007/8/10, Roland Weber [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Oliver Zeigermann wrote: Martin's and also my hopes had been that when the - indeed useful - WebDAV client was moved to a different project it could actually be revived. Reasons are that it is functional, useful and of much less complexity than the server. I would at least volunteer to support the initial move (including cleanup) to HttpComponents and once it is there am confident it will attract further contributors. The command line client should be dropped, really. So the idea would be to leave the server part behind and just cut out the WebDAV client based on HttpClient 3.x during the move? HttpClient 4.x has no API similarity to 3.x at all, so it is inevitable that the WebDAV client be ported to the new 4.0 API if it's supposed to have a future. Content related parts should be re-usable, but everything on the method level will need to be re-written. Got that. Moving Slide, or the WebDAV client from Slide, is one option. Another option is to leave Slide and it's 3.x based WebDAV client behind and just start with a new WebDAV client based on the 4.0 API in the new project. That would significantly reduce the administrative overhead and does not preclude code re-use from Slide. Maybe that could be a second step. While I would like to get rid of HttpClient 3.x rather sooner than later, there's no denyig that it will stay with us for several years to come. From this angle, it would make sense to move the WebDAV client as it is. Maybe that could be the first step. WDYT? Oliver - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
Oliver Zeigermann wrote: Martin's and also my hopes had been that when the - indeed useful - WebDAV client was moved to a different project it could actually be revived. Reasons are that it is functional, useful and of much less complexity than the server. I would at least volunteer to support the initial move (including cleanup) to HttpComponents and once it is there am confident it will attract further contributors. The command line client should be dropped, really. So the idea would be to leave the server part behind and just cut out the WebDAV client based on HttpClient 3.x during the move? HttpClient 4.x has no API similarity to 3.x at all, so it is inevitable that the WebDAV client be ported to the new 4.0 API if it's supposed to have a future. Content related parts should be re-usable, but everything on the method level will need to be re-written. Moving Slide, or the WebDAV client from Slide, is one option. Another option is to leave Slide and it's 3.x based WebDAV client behind and just start with a new WebDAV client based on the 4.0 API in the new project. That would significantly reduce the administrative overhead and does not preclude code re-use from Slide. While I would like to get rid of HttpClient 3.x rather sooner than later, there's no denyig that it will stay with us for several years to come. From this angle, it would make sense to move the WebDAV client as it is. cheers, Roland - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
2007/8/6, Roland Weber [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Oleg Kalnichevski wrote: Slide seems pretty inactive at the moment. I am just wondering how many developers out there would be willing to contribute on a more or less regular basis to the maintenance and further development of Slide, or the new TLP will effectively end up tasked with the job of trying to recreate the community around the old Slide code base, albeit with a somewhat reduced scope. Indeed a valid concern. This discussion should show how much interest there is in the Slide community. I'm not eager to sift through the backlog of 180 open issues on my own. If the Slide community is inactive, I'd prefer that HttpComponents goes TLP on it's own with a transport scope. Client WebDAV support could be added if and when community interest arises, and we wouldn't have a huge chunk of code with which we're not familiar. I agree that there is little chance to revive the server part of Slide for reasons that should not be discussed here. However, Martin's and also my hopes had been that when the - indeed useful - WebDAV client was moved to a different project it could actually be revived. Reasons are that it is functional, useful and of much less complexity than the server. I would at least volunteer to support the initial move (including cleanup) to HttpComponents and once it is there am confident it will attract further contributors. The command line client should be dropped, really. Oliver - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
2007/8/10, Roland Weber [EMAIL PROTECTED]: While I would like to get rid of HttpClient 3.x rather sooner than later, there's no denyig that it will stay with us for several years to come. From this angle, it would make sense to move the WebDAV client as it is. Maybe that could be the first step. If there is a reasonable interest of developers to help support the 3.x based WebDAV client, I am in favor of cutting it out. I hope that this discussion will heat up a bit next week. (while I'm away...) Let's see if there is... Leaving the server-side code of Slide in Jakarta will surely give the new project a better start. That code would be a huge burden on my mind, and probably not mine alone. Right. Oliver - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
Oleg Kalnichevski wrote: Slide seems pretty inactive at the moment. I am just wondering how many developers out there would be willing to contribute on a more or less regular basis to the maintenance and further development of Slide, or the new TLP will effectively end up tasked with the job of trying to recreate the community around the old Slide code base, albeit with a somewhat reduced scope. Indeed a valid concern. This discussion should show how much interest there is in the Slide community. I'm not eager to sift through the backlog of 180 open issues on my own. If the Slide community is inactive, I'd prefer that HttpComponents goes TLP on it's own with a transport scope. Client WebDAV support could be added if and when community interest arises, and we wouldn't have a huge chunk of code with which we're not familiar. cheers, Roland - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 18:45 +0200, Roland Weber wrote: Hi all, ... I've been following the Slide [3] developer list for about two months, and I've read through their home page. The last release was at the end of 2004, and development seems to have basically stopped then. Slide comprises both client and server side components, with most of the code being for the server side. Martin indicated that the server side functionality is being replaced by Jackrabbit [4], but that the client side could have a future. Slide has two client side components, a WebDAV library and a WebDAV command line tool. In case you are not familiar with it, WebDAV is an extension of HTTP. The Slide WebDAV client library is based on the old HttpClient code. Incidentally, Jackrabbit also has a WebDAV client library which is based on the old HttpClient code. So, how would the new project look like? I see it as the home of three codebases: a) HttpComponents 4.0 + modules for a WebDAV client based on the 4.0 API, active. Maybe also the command line client. b) HttpClient 3.x, in maintenance mode. c) Slide 2.1, in maintenance mode. The scope for the activities of the new project: HTTP and related, with a focus on libraries implementing the protocols rather than applications using them. related encompasses HTTP extensions such as WebDAV and CalDAV, and other HTTP-like protocols such as SIP. Compared to the current scope of HttpComponents, it is an extension towards the content layer. HttpComponents is deliberately content agnostic and focusing on the transport aspects of HTTP. Compared to the current scope of Slide, it is a strong cutback. The server-side repository architecture, including ACL and whatever, is falling out of scope. Your thoughts? Slide seems pretty inactive at the moment. I am just wondering how many developers out there would be willing to contribute on a more or less regular basis to the maintenance and further development of Slide, or the new TLP will effectively end up tasked with the job of trying to recreate the community around the old Slide code base, albeit with a somewhat reduced scope. Oleg cheers, Roland [1a] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jakarta-slide-dev/200706.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] [1b] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jakarta-httpcomponents-dev/200706.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] [2] http://jakarta.apache.org/httpcomponents/ [3] http://jakarta.apache.org/slide/ [4] http://jackrabbit.apache.org/ - 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]
[discuss] Slide + HttpComponents = TLP
Hi all, two months ago, Martin contacted Slide and HttpComponents [1a,1b] with the idea of joining them into a new Top Level Project (TLP). The initial response was positive on both sides, and I feel it is time to get the ball rolling. I'm starting this discussion thread to establish a common view on the prospective TLP. Once this is achieved, we can draft and vote on a TLP proposal. I'm from HttpComponents and joined that community when it was still around HttpClient, but after HttpClient was spun off from Commons. If I am not mistaken, HttpClient was originally spun off from Slide into Commons, since an HTTP client library was considered useful on it's own. So joining these subprojects would be a kind of re-union. HttpComponents [2] currently has responsibility for two codebases. There is the new HttpComponents 4.0 codebase, which is prospering and sees a lot of activity from established committers as well as new contributors. And there is the historic HttpClient 3.x codebase. It is running in maintenance mode, but is in widespread use and will continue to be so for years to come. The new codebase is not compatible with the old one, so even if we declare the old one obsolete, it will continue to be used. And we will continue to support users of that codebase, even though development stops. I've been following the Slide [3] developer list for about two months, and I've read through their home page. The last release was at the end of 2004, and development seems to have basically stopped then. Slide comprises both client and server side components, with most of the code being for the server side. Martin indicated that the server side functionality is being replaced by Jackrabbit [4], but that the client side could have a future. Slide has two client side components, a WebDAV library and a WebDAV command line tool. In case you are not familiar with it, WebDAV is an extension of HTTP. The Slide WebDAV client library is based on the old HttpClient code. Incidentally, Jackrabbit also has a WebDAV client library which is based on the old HttpClient code. So, how would the new project look like? I see it as the home of three codebases: a) HttpComponents 4.0 + modules for a WebDAV client based on the 4.0 API, active. Maybe also the command line client. b) HttpClient 3.x, in maintenance mode. c) Slide 2.1, in maintenance mode. The scope for the activities of the new project: HTTP and related, with a focus on libraries implementing the protocols rather than applications using them. related encompasses HTTP extensions such as WebDAV and CalDAV, and other HTTP-like protocols such as SIP. Compared to the current scope of HttpComponents, it is an extension towards the content layer. HttpComponents is deliberately content agnostic and focusing on the transport aspects of HTTP. Compared to the current scope of Slide, it is a strong cutback. The server-side repository architecture, including ACL and whatever, is falling out of scope. Your thoughts? cheers, Roland [1a] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jakarta-slide-dev/200706.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] [1b] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jakarta-httpcomponents-dev/200706.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] [2] http://jakarta.apache.org/httpcomponents/ [3] http://jakarta.apache.org/slide/ [4] http://jackrabbit.apache.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
