Re: Getting XMLBeans out of the attic
Sent from my iPad > On 2 Mar 2018, at 20:42, David Fisher wrote: > > Hi - > > The fourth option of the Apache POI PMC taking responsibility for the > XMLBeans product is where I am with both my IPMC hat and POI PMC hat would > like to take. > > We could do this by going quickly through the Incubator and graduating as a > sub-project of POI. > > The last step will be a Board resolution in all cases. > > Attic PMC which route should we take? This has been long running and the POI > and Tika communities are interested in resolving this ASAP. wearing my attic pmc hat, I can only say this is not a decision that attic can or should make. Multiple people have made the options clear, but only the POI project can decide what it want. rgds jan i > > Regards, > Dave > >> On 2018/03/02 18:28:45, Mark Murphy wrote: >> So going back to a previous thread, what would be involved with POI taking >> on XMLBeans as a second product? I believe we have enough PMC members >> willing to take it on and provide releases. We also have committers ready >> and waiting to make updates. We benefit from bug fixes, other users benefit >> from public releases, there are no naming conflicts, and we already have a >> functioning PMC capable of running an ASF project. >> >> The problem as I see it is that not only do Apache projects (Solar, Tika) >> use POI, but users of those projects also use XMLBeans to consume XML. >> Having two semi independent versions of XMLBeans in the classpath could be >> problematic. >> >> The Attic website says: >> Process of leaving the Attic again >> >> Options are: >> >> - Forking the project - we'll link to any forks which have been created >> so please let us know >> - Restarting the community in the Apache Incubator >> - Recreating a PMC for the project >> >> >> We'll take "Recreating a PMC for the project" Alex. How do we move forward >> with POI taking on XMLBeans as a second project. >> >> -- Forwarded message -- >> From: Upayavira >> To: "Javen O'Neal" , POI Developers List < >> d...@poi.apache.org> >> Cc: general@attic.apache.org, d...@xmlbeans.apache.org >> Bcc: >> Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2017 17:16:04 + >> Subject: Re: Non-maintainer upload of bugfixes for the XMLBeans library in >> the Attic >> Could POI take on XMLbeans as a second product? If they intend to >> maintain it, and can provide 3+ PMC members who will vote on releases, >> then presumably the POI project could make releases of the Apache >> XMLBeans product? >> >> Then there's no naming issues, everyone benefits from public releases. >> At such a point as there is enough interest, it can fork back into its >> own community. POI committers would gain commit rights on an XMLBeans >> repo. >> >> Upayavira >> >>> On Tue, 7 Nov 2017, at 04:59 PM, Javen O'Neal wrote: >>> Any other project using XMLBeans on Android would likely be affected by >>> the >>> same issue. Making the XMLBeans update within the POI source code or POI >>> maven coordinates would make it more difficult for others to find this >>> update. >>> >>> If we had to change the Java package name to >>> org.apache.poi.internal.xmlbeans, it would take a bit of trickery to >>> allow >>> users to continue using the official releases, XMLBeans 2.3.0 or 2.6.0 if >>> the bug doesn't affect them. >>> >>> On Nov 7, 2017 03:41, "sebb" wrote: >>> >>> On 7 November 2017 at 07:20, jan iversen wrote: Sent from my iPad > On 6 Nov 2017, at 21:47, Dominik Stadler >> wrote: > > Hi, > > The Apache XMLBeans library was moved to the Attic a few years ago > (05/2014), however Apache POI still uses the library as it's core XML > binding framework. > > While the Apache POI PMC and the development community is already > discussing possible replacements for some time, use of XMLBeans is >> still > deeply rooted and thus hard to replace quickly. > > Over time, we discovered a few grave bugs in XMLBeans which lead to > bug-reports that we cannot fix ourselves. > > Therefore we would like to start discussion about an NMU of XMLBeans to >>> get > a fix for the most pressing issues. > > See https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59268 for the full > discussion,and https://github.com/pjfanning/xmlbeans for a fork with > initial bugfixes. > > Among others, we would like to fix the following, changes for these are > already applied and verified in the github fork: > * the official XMLBeans-JAR contains duplicate classes, making it > impossible to use it on Android as the Android build fails due to this > * cannot use Unicode surogates, thus affecting use of Apache POI in > non-latin-script areas > * Remove W3C and JAVAX classes which are not needed any more since >> Java 6 > (current Apache POI development is on Java 8) > > > So is there a precedent for something like this? What steps d
Re: Getting XMLBeans out of the attic
Hi - The fourth option of the Apache POI PMC taking responsibility for the XMLBeans product is where I am with both my IPMC hat and POI PMC hat would like to take. We could do this by going quickly through the Incubator and graduating as a sub-project of POI. The last step will be a Board resolution in all cases. Attic PMC which route should we take? This has been long running and the POI and Tika communities are interested in resolving this ASAP. Regards, Dave On 2018/03/02 18:28:45, Mark Murphy wrote: > So going back to a previous thread, what would be involved with POI taking > on XMLBeans as a second product? I believe we have enough PMC members > willing to take it on and provide releases. We also have committers ready > and waiting to make updates. We benefit from bug fixes, other users benefit > from public releases, there are no naming conflicts, and we already have a > functioning PMC capable of running an ASF project. > > The problem as I see it is that not only do Apache projects (Solar, Tika) > use POI, but users of those projects also use XMLBeans to consume XML. > Having two semi independent versions of XMLBeans in the classpath could be > problematic. > > The Attic website says: > Process of leaving the Attic again > > Options are: > >- Forking the project - we'll link to any forks which have been created >so please let us know >- Restarting the community in the Apache Incubator >- Recreating a PMC for the project > > > We'll take "Recreating a PMC for the project" Alex. How do we move forward > with POI taking on XMLBeans as a second project. > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Upayavira > To: "Javen O'Neal" , POI Developers List < > d...@poi.apache.org> > Cc: general@attic.apache.org, d...@xmlbeans.apache.org > Bcc: > Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2017 17:16:04 + > Subject: Re: Non-maintainer upload of bugfixes for the XMLBeans library in > the Attic > Could POI take on XMLbeans as a second product? If they intend to > maintain it, and can provide 3+ PMC members who will vote on releases, > then presumably the POI project could make releases of the Apache > XMLBeans product? > > Then there's no naming issues, everyone benefits from public releases. > At such a point as there is enough interest, it can fork back into its > own community. POI committers would gain commit rights on an XMLBeans > repo. > > Upayavira > > On Tue, 7 Nov 2017, at 04:59 PM, Javen O'Neal wrote: > > Any other project using XMLBeans on Android would likely be affected by > > the > > same issue. Making the XMLBeans update within the POI source code or POI > > maven coordinates would make it more difficult for others to find this > > update. > > > > If we had to change the Java package name to > > org.apache.poi.internal.xmlbeans, it would take a bit of trickery to > > allow > > users to continue using the official releases, XMLBeans 2.3.0 or 2.6.0 if > > the bug doesn't affect them. > > > > On Nov 7, 2017 03:41, "sebb" wrote: > > > > On 7 November 2017 at 07:20, jan iversen wrote: > > > > > > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > > > >> On 6 Nov 2017, at 21:47, Dominik Stadler > wrote: > > >> > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> The Apache XMLBeans library was moved to the Attic a few years ago > > >> (05/2014), however Apache POI still uses the library as it's core XML > > >> binding framework. > > >> > > >> While the Apache POI PMC and the development community is already > > >> discussing possible replacements for some time, use of XMLBeans is > still > > >> deeply rooted and thus hard to replace quickly. > > >> > > >> Over time, we discovered a few grave bugs in XMLBeans which lead to > > >> bug-reports that we cannot fix ourselves. > > >> > > >> Therefore we would like to start discussion about an NMU of XMLBeans to > > get > > >> a fix for the most pressing issues. > > >> > > >> See https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59268 for the full > > >> discussion,and https://github.com/pjfanning/xmlbeans for a fork with > > >> initial bugfixes. > > >> > > >> Among others, we would like to fix the following, changes for these are > > >> already applied and verified in the github fork: > > >> * the official XMLBeans-JAR contains duplicate classes, making it > > >> impossible to use it on Android as the Android build fails due to this > > >> * cannot use Unicode surogates, thus affecting use of Apache POI in > > >> non-latin-script areas > > >> * Remove W3C and JAVAX classes which are not needed any more since > Java 6 > > >> (current Apache POI development is on Java 8) > > >> > > >> > > >> So is there a precedent for something like this? What steps do we need > to > > >> make to get an updated version of XMLBeans published? > > > > > > Others might have examples of how it was done in the past. Making a fork > > on e.g. github with a new non-apache name is the simplest way. > > > > > > However if I understand it correct your intention is only to maintain > > XMLbeans for the benefit o
Re: Getting XMLBeans out of the attic
Talk to the board about it, on board@. Tell them who will be on the PMC, what experience they have of being on the PMC, and how many of those people are ASF members. Tell them whether you want to keep the old name, or start with a new name. If they think it stands a chance of becoming a new TLP, then look at Apache Royale as an example of how to craft a resolution (some time late last year?) HTH Upayavira On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, at 6:37 PM, Jan Iversen wrote: > > > > On 2 Mar 2018, at 19:28, Mark Murphy wrote: > > > > So going back to a previous thread, what would be involved with POI taking > > on XMLBeans as a second product? I believe we have enough PMC members > > willing to take it on and provide releases. We also have committers ready > > and waiting to make updates. We benefit from bug fixes, other users benefit > > from public releases, there are no naming conflicts, and we already have a > > functioning PMC capable of running an ASF project. > > > > The problem as I see it is that not only do Apache projects (Solar, Tika) > > use POI, but users of those projects also use XMLBeans to consume XML. > > Having two semi independent versions of XMLBeans in the classpath could be > > problematic. > > > > The Attic website says: > > Process of leaving the Attic again > > > > Options are: > > > > - Forking the project - we'll link to any forks which have been created > > so please let us know > > - Restarting the community in the Apache Incubator > > - Recreating a PMC for the project > > > > > > We'll take "Recreating a PMC for the project" Alex. How do we move forward > > with POI taking on XMLBeans as a second project. > > > For that option, you need to reestablish XmlBeans as a TLP, and to do > that you need to send a resolution by the board. > > I am not expert on how to establish a TLP, but I suspect the Board will > look for more than just 3 PMC members to ensure voting, I suspect they > will look for a community in order to ensure the project have a chance > of surviving (please remember nobody stepped up to help, before XmlBeans > were moved to the attic). > > Please note, I have no opinion on what POI chooses, I am merely trying > to give information. As Attic-PMC I would of course be happy to see old > projects being reused within the 3 options. > > rgds > Jan I. > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > > From: Upayavira > > To: "Javen O'Neal" , POI Developers List < > > d...@poi.apache.org> > > Cc: general@attic.apache.org, d...@xmlbeans.apache.org > > Bcc: > > Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2017 17:16:04 + > > Subject: Re: Non-maintainer upload of bugfixes for the XMLBeans library in > > the Attic > > Could POI take on XMLbeans as a second product? If they intend to > > maintain it, and can provide 3+ PMC members who will vote on releases, > > then presumably the POI project could make releases of the Apache > > XMLBeans product? > > > > Then there's no naming issues, everyone benefits from public releases. > > At such a point as there is enough interest, it can fork back into its > > own community. POI committers would gain commit rights on an XMLBeans > > repo. > > > > Upayavira > > > > On Tue, 7 Nov 2017, at 04:59 PM, Javen O'Neal wrote: > >> Any other project using XMLBeans on Android would likely be affected by > >> the > >> same issue. Making the XMLBeans update within the POI source code or POI > >> maven coordinates would make it more difficult for others to find this > >> update. > >> > >> If we had to change the Java package name to > >> org.apache.poi.internal.xmlbeans, it would take a bit of trickery to > >> allow > >> users to continue using the official releases, XMLBeans 2.3.0 or 2.6.0 if > >> the bug doesn't affect them. > >> > >> On Nov 7, 2017 03:41, "sebb" wrote: > >> > >> On 7 November 2017 at 07:20, jan iversen wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> Sent from my iPad > >>> > On 6 Nov 2017, at 21:47, Dominik Stadler > > wrote: > > Hi, > > The Apache XMLBeans library was moved to the Attic a few years ago > (05/2014), however Apache POI still uses the library as it's core XML > binding framework. > > While the Apache POI PMC and the development community is already > discussing possible replacements for some time, use of XMLBeans is > > still > deeply rooted and thus hard to replace quickly. > > Over time, we discovered a few grave bugs in XMLBeans which lead to > bug-reports that we cannot fix ourselves. > > Therefore we would like to start discussion about an NMU of XMLBeans to > >> get > a fix for the most pressing issues. > > See https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59268 for the full > discussion,and https://github.com/pjfanning/xmlbeans for a fork with > initial bugfixes. > > Among others, we would like to fix the following, changes for these are > already applied and verified in the github fork: > >>
Re: Getting XMLBeans out of the attic
> On 2 Mar 2018, at 19:28, Mark Murphy wrote: > > So going back to a previous thread, what would be involved with POI taking > on XMLBeans as a second product? I believe we have enough PMC members > willing to take it on and provide releases. We also have committers ready > and waiting to make updates. We benefit from bug fixes, other users benefit > from public releases, there are no naming conflicts, and we already have a > functioning PMC capable of running an ASF project. > > The problem as I see it is that not only do Apache projects (Solar, Tika) > use POI, but users of those projects also use XMLBeans to consume XML. > Having two semi independent versions of XMLBeans in the classpath could be > problematic. > > The Attic website says: > Process of leaving the Attic again > > Options are: > > - Forking the project - we'll link to any forks which have been created > so please let us know > - Restarting the community in the Apache Incubator > - Recreating a PMC for the project > > > We'll take "Recreating a PMC for the project" Alex. How do we move forward > with POI taking on XMLBeans as a second project. > For that option, you need to reestablish XmlBeans as a TLP, and to do that you need to send a resolution by the board. I am not expert on how to establish a TLP, but I suspect the Board will look for more than just 3 PMC members to ensure voting, I suspect they will look for a community in order to ensure the project have a chance of surviving (please remember nobody stepped up to help, before XmlBeans were moved to the attic). Please note, I have no opinion on what POI chooses, I am merely trying to give information. As Attic-PMC I would of course be happy to see old projects being reused within the 3 options. rgds Jan I. > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Upayavira > To: "Javen O'Neal" , POI Developers List < > d...@poi.apache.org> > Cc: general@attic.apache.org, d...@xmlbeans.apache.org > Bcc: > Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2017 17:16:04 + > Subject: Re: Non-maintainer upload of bugfixes for the XMLBeans library in > the Attic > Could POI take on XMLbeans as a second product? If they intend to > maintain it, and can provide 3+ PMC members who will vote on releases, > then presumably the POI project could make releases of the Apache > XMLBeans product? > > Then there's no naming issues, everyone benefits from public releases. > At such a point as there is enough interest, it can fork back into its > own community. POI committers would gain commit rights on an XMLBeans > repo. > > Upayavira > > On Tue, 7 Nov 2017, at 04:59 PM, Javen O'Neal wrote: >> Any other project using XMLBeans on Android would likely be affected by >> the >> same issue. Making the XMLBeans update within the POI source code or POI >> maven coordinates would make it more difficult for others to find this >> update. >> >> If we had to change the Java package name to >> org.apache.poi.internal.xmlbeans, it would take a bit of trickery to >> allow >> users to continue using the official releases, XMLBeans 2.3.0 or 2.6.0 if >> the bug doesn't affect them. >> >> On Nov 7, 2017 03:41, "sebb" wrote: >> >> On 7 November 2017 at 07:20, jan iversen wrote: >>> >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> On 6 Nov 2017, at 21:47, Dominik Stadler > wrote: Hi, The Apache XMLBeans library was moved to the Attic a few years ago (05/2014), however Apache POI still uses the library as it's core XML binding framework. While the Apache POI PMC and the development community is already discussing possible replacements for some time, use of XMLBeans is > still deeply rooted and thus hard to replace quickly. Over time, we discovered a few grave bugs in XMLBeans which lead to bug-reports that we cannot fix ourselves. Therefore we would like to start discussion about an NMU of XMLBeans to >> get a fix for the most pressing issues. See https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59268 for the full discussion,and https://github.com/pjfanning/xmlbeans for a fork with initial bugfixes. Among others, we would like to fix the following, changes for these are already applied and verified in the github fork: * the official XMLBeans-JAR contains duplicate classes, making it impossible to use it on Android as the Android build fails due to this * cannot use Unicode surogates, thus affecting use of Apache POI in non-latin-script areas * Remove W3C and JAVAX classes which are not needed any more since > Java 6 (current Apache POI development is on Java 8) So is there a precedent for something like this? What steps do we need > to make to get an updated version of XMLBeans published? >>> >>> Others might have examples of how it was done in the past. Making a fork >> on e.g. github with a new non-apache name is the simplest way. >>> >>> However if I u
Getting XMLBeans out of the attic
So going back to a previous thread, what would be involved with POI taking on XMLBeans as a second product? I believe we have enough PMC members willing to take it on and provide releases. We also have committers ready and waiting to make updates. We benefit from bug fixes, other users benefit from public releases, there are no naming conflicts, and we already have a functioning PMC capable of running an ASF project. The problem as I see it is that not only do Apache projects (Solar, Tika) use POI, but users of those projects also use XMLBeans to consume XML. Having two semi independent versions of XMLBeans in the classpath could be problematic. The Attic website says: Process of leaving the Attic again Options are: - Forking the project - we'll link to any forks which have been created so please let us know - Restarting the community in the Apache Incubator - Recreating a PMC for the project We'll take "Recreating a PMC for the project" Alex. How do we move forward with POI taking on XMLBeans as a second project. -- Forwarded message -- From: Upayavira To: "Javen O'Neal" , POI Developers List < d...@poi.apache.org> Cc: general@attic.apache.org, d...@xmlbeans.apache.org Bcc: Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2017 17:16:04 + Subject: Re: Non-maintainer upload of bugfixes for the XMLBeans library in the Attic Could POI take on XMLbeans as a second product? If they intend to maintain it, and can provide 3+ PMC members who will vote on releases, then presumably the POI project could make releases of the Apache XMLBeans product? Then there's no naming issues, everyone benefits from public releases. At such a point as there is enough interest, it can fork back into its own community. POI committers would gain commit rights on an XMLBeans repo. Upayavira On Tue, 7 Nov 2017, at 04:59 PM, Javen O'Neal wrote: > Any other project using XMLBeans on Android would likely be affected by > the > same issue. Making the XMLBeans update within the POI source code or POI > maven coordinates would make it more difficult for others to find this > update. > > If we had to change the Java package name to > org.apache.poi.internal.xmlbeans, it would take a bit of trickery to > allow > users to continue using the official releases, XMLBeans 2.3.0 or 2.6.0 if > the bug doesn't affect them. > > On Nov 7, 2017 03:41, "sebb" wrote: > > On 7 November 2017 at 07:20, jan iversen wrote: > > > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > >> On 6 Nov 2017, at 21:47, Dominik Stadler wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> The Apache XMLBeans library was moved to the Attic a few years ago > >> (05/2014), however Apache POI still uses the library as it's core XML > >> binding framework. > >> > >> While the Apache POI PMC and the development community is already > >> discussing possible replacements for some time, use of XMLBeans is still > >> deeply rooted and thus hard to replace quickly. > >> > >> Over time, we discovered a few grave bugs in XMLBeans which lead to > >> bug-reports that we cannot fix ourselves. > >> > >> Therefore we would like to start discussion about an NMU of XMLBeans to > get > >> a fix for the most pressing issues. > >> > >> See https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59268 for the full > >> discussion,and https://github.com/pjfanning/xmlbeans for a fork with > >> initial bugfixes. > >> > >> Among others, we would like to fix the following, changes for these are > >> already applied and verified in the github fork: > >> * the official XMLBeans-JAR contains duplicate classes, making it > >> impossible to use it on Android as the Android build fails due to this > >> * cannot use Unicode surogates, thus affecting use of Apache POI in > >> non-latin-script areas > >> * Remove W3C and JAVAX classes which are not needed any more since Java 6 > >> (current Apache POI development is on Java 8) > >> > >> > >> So is there a precedent for something like this? What steps do we need to > >> make to get an updated version of XMLBeans published? > > > > Others might have examples of how it was done in the past. Making a fork > on e.g. github with a new non-apache name is the simplest way. > > > > However if I understand it correct your intention is only to maintain > XMLbeans for the benefit of POI. That gives you (as I see it) another > option, you can include the source code in your project and do the > patches > as part of your project. > > I think it would need to be in a different package to avoid possible > confusion with the original. > And it should be obvious that it is not intended for external use. > > e.g. org.apache.poi.internal.xmlbeans > > > rgds > > jan i > >> > >> > >> Thanks... Dominik > >> > >> On behalf of the Apache POI PMC > >> > >> > >> About Apache POI > >> --- > >> > >> Apache POI is well-known in the Java field as a library for reading and > >> writing Microsoft Office file formats, such as Excel, PowerPoint, Word, > >> Visio, Publisher and Outlook. It supports both the older (
