Donald Woods wrote: > <snip/> The only complication, is that we would need to > offer committership to Roman from Agimatec as soon as the Incubator IP > clearance is finished, as he would need to be the one to remove the > existing Agimatec copyright statements. Thoughts?
I am not familiar enough with the code to comment, but from a process standpoint, Roman could remove the copyright statements before submitting, if that is what he / Agimatec wanted to do. In any case, once granted, existing committers could work with the code and Roman could submit patches. We have done this several times in Commons: contributors who are not committers grant code, then earn merit in the normal way by submitting patches and contributing on the mailing lists. Phil > > > [1] > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/trunk/geronimo-validation_1.0_spec > > > [2] http://code.google.com/p/agimatec-validation/ > > > -Donald > > > Niall Pemberton wrote: >> The current trunk in the validator2 sandbox is a copy of the Validator >> 1.4 code from "commons proper" - but I think we should dump all the >> existing validator framework code and just retain the "routines" >> package. Trying to maintain any sort of compatibility with the >> existing validator framework would be alot more work and code and >> create a real mess IMO and I think it would be better to not to even >> try. The "routines" package was refactored realtively recently(!) and >> can stand on its own. >> >> So I would like to propose the following direction for a Validator2 >> based on the Bean Validation Framework(JSR 303) - a project with three >> separate modules composing of: >> >> - The Bean Validation (JSR303) API - no dependencies >> - Standalone Validation Routines (based on existing validator >> routines package) - no dependencies including Bean Validation API >> - Validation Framework - JSR303 implementation (depends on two >> modules above) >> >> I have created an alternative branch in the Validator sandbox project >> based on the above approach: >> >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/sandbox/validator2/branches/alternative/ >> >> >> I have created a "clean room" implementation of the Bean Validation >> API[1] which (hopefully) is complete except for JavaDocs. The only >> real functionality is in javax.validation.Validation - the rest are >> annotations, interfaces and exceptions. I have also copied the >> "routines" package into a standalone module[2]. So the next thing is >> to start the actual framework implementation module. >> >> How does this sound as an approach? >> >> Niall >> >> [1] >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/sandbox/validator2/branches/alternative/validation-api/ >> >> [2] >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/sandbox/validator2/branches/alternative/validation-routines/ >> >> [3] >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/sandbox/validator2/branches/alternative/validation-framework/ >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
