On 8 February 2011 15:17, Thorsten Scherler <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 10:52 +0100, Chapuis Bertil wrote:
> > I agree. We have to release.
>
> So let us plan that in a new thread.
>
> >
> > The changes I'd like to contribute back are the following.
> >
> >    - TaskQueue repleaced by java.util.Queue
>
> You committed that in /incubator/droids/branch/bchapuis, right?
>


Yes, I mainly created this branch to perform the changes we discussed about
the documentation and the reorganisation of the trunk (DROIDS-107).
I committed some changes to use the maven site plugin and I'm thinking about
translating the current xdoc files into apt files. The aim is to simplify
the creation of documentation.



>
> Still need to review it in detail, but looks good from first sight.
>
> >    - Handling process reviewed.
> >    - Factory pattern only used for Worker
> >    - Extractors inherit from Handler => no need to parse the document
> twice
>
> The three points above I second. I actually using droids ATM in
> combination with cocoon3 which completely changes the extractor/handler
> pattern. So ATM I only use the queue, filter and the cocoon pipeline
> parser for parser/handling (I think later on you call them extractor).
>
> In the cocoon pipeline parser I am using various transformer like the
> solr one you provided to inject the parse result into the different
> third party server (solr, persistence, REST consumer, ...). The nice
> thing on the approach is that I can limit the transformation logic of
> "page of origin" to extracted data to xsl stylesheet since I use the
> html-generator in cocoon. The data mapping is ATM quite based on my
> usecase but that could be generalized (for some transformer like the
> solr one better then other).
>
> >    - Entity renamed in Identifier
> >    - ContentEntity renamed in Resource
> >    - Crawler moved to droids-crawler
> >    - Parser moved to droids-parser
> >    - Walker moved to droids-walker
> >    - The walker also use an Extractor
> >    - some minor changes
>
> sounds like not to difficult to merge/switch to your branch.
>
> salu2
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On 8 February 2011 10:32, Thorsten Scherler <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 09:50 +0100, Chapuis Bertil wrote:
> > > > In previous emails and jira comments I saw several people mentionning
> the
> > > > fact they have a local copy of droids which evolved too much to be
> merged
> > > > back with the trunk. This is my case, and I think Paul Rogalinski is
> in
> > > the
> > > > same situation.
> > > >
> > > > Since the patches have only been applied periodically on the trunk
> during
> > > > the last months, I'd love to know if someone else is in the same
> > > situation
> > > > and what can of changes they made locally.
> > >
> > > I am not sure but I see it like you describe.
> > >
> > > IMO we should release what we have right now and then plan how to merge
> > > back all this different versions into a new droids version.
> > >
> > > IMO the next droids version should focus on ease of reuse and a droid
> > > server which starts and monitors the different droids.
> > >
> > > To start with:
> > > * who has a version of droids which (s)he is interested to merge back
> > > * what are the main difference between the forge and the "original"
> > > * ...
> > >
> > > salu2
> > > --
> > > Thorsten Scherler <thorsten.at.apache.org>
> > > codeBusters S.L. - web based systems
> > > <consulting, training and solutions>
> > > http://www.codebusters.es/
> > >
>
> --
> Thorsten Scherler <thorsten.at.apache.org>
> codeBusters S.L. - web based systems
> <consulting, training and solutions>
> http://www.codebusters.es/
>
>


-- 
Bertil Chapuis
Agimem Sàrl
http://www.agimem.com

Reply via email to