I can help out and take alook at the runtime support for the Processed Annotations you mentioned Rich.
On 9/14/05, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Assuming we do this, I'll take everything under netui/src/compiler-core > (generation of config files for Struts, Validator, Processed Annotations). > > Rich > > Carlin Rogers wrote: > > >Thanks for the update Eddie. I like option three (non-binding, not a > >committer), shipping 1.0 without XMLBeans dependence but still support > >XMLBean-related features for the users. I agree with the additional > benefits > >both you and Rich have outlined. > > > >The URL template config file parsing in the DefaultURLTemplatesFactory is > >straightforward and can easily be implemented with DOM. Depending on the > >discussion and direction taken, I can contribute a patch with changes in > the > >DefaultURLTemplatesFactory to support option 3. > > > >Carlin > > > > > >On 9/14/05, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >>I definitely think we should go with option #3. We would continue to > >>support XMLBeans in Beehive features (e.g., using an XMLBean directly as > >>a form bean for a Page Flow action), but there's no urgent need to use > >>XMLBeans internally for things like writing out Struts config files > >>(which don't even have an official schema). This also lets us avoid > >>forcing a particular version of apache-xbean.jar on our users. > >> > >>Rich > >> > >>Eddie O'Neil wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>All-- > >>> > >>>If you've been following the JSR 173 discussion with XMLBeans, you > >>>know that we've been discussing a licensing issue around these APIs. > >>>At this point, the Beehive 1.0 is effectively blocked on XMLBeans > >>>resolving this licensing problem. > >>> > >>>In order to ship Beehive 1.0 in the next few days, I see us at a > >>>point where we have some hard decisions to make. Some options: > >>> > >>>1) hold the Beehive ship for resolution to the licensing issue. It's > >>>not clear how long this will take; I've been in some discussions with > >>>BEA Legal, and it's possible that this could take a bit to figure out. > >>>But, it's hard to tell...hopefully some discussion / update of this > >>>will happen on [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>2) ship Beehive 1.0 but require end-users to download JSR 173 and > >>>accept its license. Until users do this, it won't be possible to use > >>>Page Flow. Personally, I'm not fond of this option because it forces > >>>those interested in using Beehive to perform additional assembly in > >>>order to make the distribution work. It also forces acceptance of the > >>>JSR 173 license, which some organizations might not like > >>>3) decouple from having a binary dependence on XMLBeans. In the form > >>>Beehive will ship for 1.0, this includes removing this dependence in > >>>NetUI and the shipping system controls (EJB, JMS, and JDBC). Controls > >>>doesn't have an XMLBean dependency. NetUI has a binary dependency on > >>>XMLBeans in the compiler at build-time and for some XML parsing done > >>>at run time. > >>> > >>>Honestly, I'm *dying* to ship Beehive 1.0 :) and would pick option (3) > >>>above. I've taken a crack at rewriting the parsing for the > >>>beehive-netui-config.xml file, and it wasn't difficult to do. It also > >>>seems possible to have Beehive *support* XMLBean features that aren't > >>>enabled by default. For example, in the JdbcControl today, it's > >>>possible to map a ResultSet onto an XMLBean, but this type converter > >>>isn't required by default and is enabled based on *use* of XMLBeans, > >>>which implies its presence. > >>> > >>>So, in (3), we could take the stance that Beehive 1.0 ships without > >>>XMLBeans but that XMLBean-related features can be enabled if Beehive > >>>users wish to download XMLBeans and use it with our distribution. > >>>Seems like we could do this with *no loss of features*. > >>> > >>>This also has a few benefits: > >>> > >>>1) the distribution download will be somewhat smaller (maybe 15% or > >>> > >>> > >>more?) > >> > >> > >>>2) we don't prescribe a version of XMLBeans and let users pick a > version > >>> > >>> > >>to use > >> > >> > >>>3) selfishly, developing Beehive in an IDE gets easier because schemas > >>>don't need to be generated on the command line :) > >>> > >>>Let's discuss our options for a bit and then put it up for a > >>>vote...additional thoughts / comments? > >>> > >>>Eddie > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>On 9/11/05, Eddie O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>And, of course, the link helps... > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/xmlbeans-dev/200509.mbox/[EMAIL > PROTECTED] > >> > >> > >>>>:) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>On 9/11/05, Eddie O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>Just to keep everyone updated... > >>>>> > >>>>>This is the most recent post from Cliff into the [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>mailing list. Looks like we're not quite out of the woods yet on the > >>>>>JSR 173 API licensing issue. > >>>>> > >>>>>I'll send more info along as I see it... > >>>>> > >>>>>Eddie > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>On 9/8/05, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>I agree -- great news. Thanks for dealing with it! 1.0, here we > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>come... > >> > >> > >>>>>>Rich > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Eddie O'Neil wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>Steve-- > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>I don't see any additional blocking ones in JIRA and agree -- seems > >>>>>>>like it's time to cut a branch. Will spin out a vote on doing so... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Eddie > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>On 9/8/05, Steven Tocco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Eddie, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>That is great news! > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Are there any other blocking issues preventing a branch being > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>created > >> > >> > >>>>>>>>for v1? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Thanks > >>>>>>>>Steve > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>-----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>>From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>>>>Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 2:51 PM > >>>>>>>>To: Beehive Developers > >>>>>>>>Subject: Re: xmlbeans, jsr173, and BEEHIVE-872 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>All-- > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>I just committed a change that switches Beehive onto the new JSR > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>173 > >> > >> > >>>>>>>>API package. This has been vetted by the appropriate lawyers to > >>>>>>>>ensure that the license for the 173 API JAR is Apache compatible > and > >>>>>>>>can be shipped with a Beehive distribution. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>The XMLBeans committers are asking for advice from ASF folks about > >>>>>>>>what to do with their 2.0 release. I suppose it's possible that > >>>>>>>>they'll need to re-roll the release. If that happens, we'll need > to > >>>>>>>>decide whether to upgrade the XMLBean version we ship, though I'd > >>>>>>>>guess any new version they release will be compatible with the 2.0 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>from June. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>The change I committed does a few things: > >>>>>>>>- switches the download package for JSR 173 from > >>>>>>>>http://workshop.bea.com/xmlbeans > >>>>>>>>- bundles the new JSR 173 API JAR in a distribution > >>>>>>>>- adds a LICENSE.jsr173-api file to both SVN and to the > distribution > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>I'm going to go ahead and close the JIRA issue since our license > >>>>>>>>issue should be resolved; let's watch dev@ to see where XMLBeans > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>goes > >> > >> > >>>>>>>>with this next. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Questions / comments? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Eddie > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>On 9/7/05, Eddie O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>Oh, yeah...here's the XMLBeans change from this morinng about the > >>>>>>>>>JSR 173 bundle: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/xmlbeans-commits/200509.mbox/%3 > >> > >> > >>>>>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>On 9/7/05, Eddie O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>All-- > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>If you've been reading the release status e-mails that have been > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>in > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>the list, you've noticed that BEEHIVE-872 is tracking a license > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>issue > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>with XMLBeans and their dependency on the JSR 173 API JAR. There > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>was > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>a change in the XMLBeans mailing list this morning that switched > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>onto > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>a new JSR 173 download bundle that has some different license > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>verbage > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>in it. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>There's mail in [EMAIL PROTECTED] that checks to make sure that the > >>>>>>>>>>license issue is resolved, but if it's taken care of from their > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>side, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>I'm sitting on a change that will add the correct license to our > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>SVN > >> > >> > >>>>>>>>>>tree and download and will switch us onto the new JSR 173 > package. > >>>>>>>>>>Once the status of this is clear, I'll commit that and resolve > the > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>1.0 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>blocking JIRA issue. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>Eddie > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > > > > >
