Patrick,
I'm replying to you on [EMAIL PROTECTED] The projects@ list is
a catchall for projects that don't have their own list, but the place where
you want to discuss a proposal is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
There are other meta-data projects within the ASF, and meta-data is
certainly becoming a key issue. Container projects such as Avalon,
Geronimo, Hivemind, etc., are a few of the once that could benefit from
meta-data.
You basic "service provider" approach of using an implementation-agnostic
user side, and implementations for various meta-data implementations looks
like a good way to address the problem.
Have you approached any of the projects, such as Geronimo? If it were
accepted into the Incubator, where would you expect the code to go
eventually? And how big would you say your contributor community is today?
--- Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Calahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 15:27
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Fwd: moving JAM to org.apache.jam
Hello. I'm a committer on the xml-beans project. As part of my work
there, I've written an API called 'JAM' (Java API for Metadata) that is
becoming a useful technology in its own right. JAM is distinct from
xml-beans - it is used by xbean's java-to-schema compilers, but JAM does
not use xbeans at all.
I built JAM to solve a particular set of problems that I have relating to
metadata and JSR175, and I believe that many other java developers are
going to need a solution to those same problems very soon. I already have
some consumers of the API who don't care about xbeans - they only want the
services that JAM provides.
Accordingly, I am trying to give it some more visibility. One thing I
would like to do is give it a better package name; it currently is
org.apache.xmlbean.impl.jam
Ideally, I would like it to be
org.apache.jam
but I'm not sure what Apache's policies are on using top-level package
names - I figured I'd better talk to someone about it first. I bounced the
idea off of the xmlbeans-dev list last week, and everyone there seems ok
with it (email appended).
Ultimately, I really think JAM should be a separate project. I'd love for
it to be an Apache project if possible, though I'm not sure what I should
do to start that process.
If you want to read more about JAM, I've temporarily posted the docs and
some white papers here:
http://www.pcal.net/jam
Thanks,
-p
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 11:22:08 -0800
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: Patrick Calahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: moving JAM to org.apache.jam
>X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N
>X-PMX-Version: 4.1.1.86173
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Mar 2004 19:22:16.0831 (UTC)
>FILETIME=[5324B0F0:01C40D1E]
>
>Hey all. I am exploring the possibility of moving JAM into it's own
>package space, e.g. 'org.apache.jam.' I'd like to bring it up out of the
>bowels of the xbeans impl because it is proving to be a useful technology
>to other projects. For example, Cedric Beust already has two open source
>projects which he has converted to JAM, including the widely-used EJBgen:
>
> http://www.beust.com/ejbgen
> http://www.beust.com/sgen
>
>It's a little awkward to ask people to keep importing
>'org.apache.xmlbean.impl.jam' for something that (from their perspective)
>doesn't have anything to do with xbeans.
>
>I'm assuming that the powers-that-be at Apache can't have people just
>claiming package names at will, so I am going to bring this up with the
>incubator group (or whomever is appropriate). Before I do, though, I just
>wanted to ping everyone here to make sure they think this seems ok.
>
>Thanks,
>-p
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
