Now to address, Andy's other issues (the first issue has spun off into a different thread)...
On Thursday, July 03, 2003 8:57 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > 2. Pick your project. I think it would have been a lot less > confusing to mail the proposal to Jakarta or XML. Personally, if > this is a Java only project, I think it should go to Jakarta. If it > is a mult-platform C a/o C++ and Java, then it make sense for it to > be part of XML. The proposers and sponsors should just decide and go > in a single direction rather than kicking off a big debate. This is definitely a Java-only project right now. If that is a clear line of separation, I will stop posting to the XML list. The reason I posted to both lists was partly due to the fact that XMLBeans is much more XML-centric than Java centric (in terms of data modeling and the full fidelity availability of the XML Infoset); I really feel like this is one of those projects that could go either way. The other reason for posting to both lists is that three different Apache people (two of them ASF members) advised me to do so. I'm definitely interested in feedback as to whether to just limit the discussion to Jakarta right now. > 3. Duplication of effort. The project encompasses schema validation > which is done my XML parsers and it is Yet Another XML->Java binding > API (there are some here and several elsewhere). From the standpoint > of something I'd commit code to, this bores the crap out of me. From > the standpoint of acceptability, its totally irrelevant. Choice is > good, competition and cooperation exist not only in opensource but > often in the same area of given projects. Thus if it can become an > Apache community, then its irrelevant. I've tried to address some of the differences with XMLBeans and why I think it adds a lot more than currently existing projects (see my response to Howard -- http://archives.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg? [EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=15061). However, this might be a good time for David Bau, the architect behind XMLBeans, to jump in with his views. > 4. Machiavelli - I originally posted this to a private list because I > didnšt think it was good to say publicly, but rounding things out > here might be good. Thus anointing BEA into the real open source and > Apache world is a motivation. I don't think this project should be > accepted without meeting the basic qualifications because of that, > but maybe its a motivation to be a little more helpful than usual > ;-). It might also round out the power structure at Apache a little > if BEA began participating. We would appreciate any help anyone has to offer, but I'm hoping we don't appear to need any special treatment. I've spent the last few months talking to everyone I can and reading everything I can about how to do this right. You and Howard have brought up some very reasonable points and I want to make sure I address them (either with further explanation or by making whatever changes to this proposal are necessary). Thanks, Cliff --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
