Dims, that's exactly what I was thinking. Lets incubate it here and then
push it out once it's picked up some traction.
Davanum Srinivas
<[email protected]
m> To
[email protected]
10/08/2010 08:40 cc
AM
Subject
Re: A new JSON model
Please respond to
wink-...@incubato
r.apache.org
+1 from me Nick. Once people start using it and want to use it outside of
Wink, they can just use the stand alone jar.
If there is more traction, we can even move it to a separate ASF project if
needed.
thanks,
dims
On 10/08/2010 09:36 AM, Nicholas L Gallardo wrote:
>
>
> Today, developers are able to model JSON content using a number of object
> forms. In Wink, the two most common forms are a) creating/modeling JSON
> via Jackson and Java beans, and b) creating/model via the APIs in the
> json.org library. The former stands as is without issue. From a
technical
> standpoint, the latter is a fine solution, but the license of the
json.org
> library is not something that several Wink consumers are unwilling to
> accept.
>
> As a solution, I'd like to contribute a similar library called JSON4J and
> have that included as a separate module within Wink. This code has
existed
> for a few years now within IBM and provides a similar model to what the
> json.org library includes. The API is simple and based on standard Java
> collection APIs. Specific APIs exist for JSON objects, arrays, strings
> along with utility classes for converting to/from XML.
>
> The APIs have been abstracted from the original JSON4J implementation to
> provide the greatest level of compatibility with existing json.org
> signatures. As such, the end goal is to provide a package for which
> migration is as close as simple package rename as possible.
>
> I will be creating a JIRA with a patch that includes the classes and
> available unit tests. I'd like to request the community's input on the
> desire for this type of package. My view would be to have this be
included
> as a separate Maven module under the base tree.
>
> -Nick
