Phil, There's also the fork of JavaServer2.0 that I did last year:
https://github.com/mediashelf/sword2-server which changed the packaging from war to jar, implemented multipart/related support and some general maven/dependency maintenance. I did that as part of a very limited implementation of SWORD 2 for Fedora: https://github.com/mediashelf/sword2-fedora -Eddie On Jun 20, 2013, at 3:22 PM, LEWIS Stuart <stuart.le...@ed.ac.uk> wrote: > Hi Phil, > >> I forked https://github.com/swordapp/JavaServer2.0 and implemented the >> very minimal number of interfaces to get it to respond to some basic >> SWORD v2 operations such as retrieving a (fake) service document and >> (the very beginnings of) depositing a binary. > >> I called the repo "Minimal viable SWORD v2 server implemented in Java" >> (though it's hardly viable) and you can find it at >> https://github.com/dvn/swordv2-java-minimal > > Thanks for sharing this. The JavaServer.20 was originally written as part of > the DSpace SWORDv2 implementation, but it was thought at the time it would be > worth abstracting out the SWORD part from DSpace part, in the hope that this > might be reusable. As far as I know, you're the first person to try using > outside of DSpace (hence the lack of any other implementation or past > experience). > > Richard Jones wrote this and may be able to give you a few pointers, however > he is offline this week at a conference (OAI8 in Geneva). If you're > attending Open Repositories next month, I'm sure he'd be happy to say hello > and talk more about the code. > > >> p.s. I'm growing concerned that this mailing list is so quiet (and >> only admins can see the number of people subscribed). Have people >> moved on from SWORD to some other standard? If so, which one? > > I just checked - there are 175 subscribers to this list. > > As far as I know, SWORD is the main contender in town when it comes to a > standardized deposit interface to this type of repository. I've also > wondered about the quietness of this list. I think there may be a few > reasons: one, is that a lot of repository users are still grappling with > their repositories, without yet getting as far as accepting remote deposits. > Second, SWORD doesn't yet really have an active community sharing deposit > tools. Partly this is because many uses of SWORD will be very specific > point-to-point integrations, which might not be of interest to too many > others. > > It would be good to hear a wider discussion about this, and how we share more > about our individual uses of SWORD. > > Thanks, > > > > Stuart Lewis > Head of Research and Learning Services > Deputy Director Library & University Collections, Information Services > University of Edinburgh > stuart.le...@ed.ac.uk > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev _______________________________________________ sword-app-tech mailing list sword-app-tech@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sword-app-tech