On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Harald Wellmann <[email protected] > wrote:
> Am 05.11.2011 12:57, schrieb Toni Menzel: > > Hey Harald, >> >> great you consider OPS4J here. I think it would be nice to have stronger >> non Pax projects in the community, also to broaden the area to non OSGi >> projects. >> > > Sounds good - and while I really like OSGi, there's still a lot of useful > things you can do without it ;-) > > > As of JAXB, haven't really worked with it in recent years, so cannot >> really judge about the usefulness - if you want to say so. But reading >> from >> http://code.google.com/p/jaxb-**visitor/<http://code.google.com/p/jaxb-visitor/>it >> looks like a worthwhile. >> I would agree with putting it, specially using the name "XVisitor", into >> OPS4J. >> > > I've been doing a lot of XML document processing over the past couple of > months which was greatly simplified by introducing a JAXB model instead of > working on the DOM tree directly. > > I'm already using a modified version of the jaxb-visitor project to > extract information from the JAXB models, so I do think the approach is > very useful, provided there is a not-too-exotic XSD, and the documents are > small enough to fit into RAM. > > > >> One question i have is, did you talk to the >> http://code.google.com/p/jaxb-**visitor/<http://code.google.com/p/jaxb-visitor/>guys >> already possibly merging the >> two ? (mostly if you are improving the original project e.g. forking) >> >> > Yes, I sent them a patch in April and they said they were busy with other > things, > > The patch has not been applied yet, and there have been no commits since > May. > > Anyway, by now I'd like to go into a rather different direction by making > depth-first traversal with callbacks the default behaviour for the visitors. > > The design of jaxb-visitor is perfectly fine as such, but one size does > not fit all, and I'm just trying to take a similar but incompatible > approach which is better suited to my use cases. > > Regarding incubation, I do agree it would be useful to set up a standard > procedure for this. > > Only in the case of XVisitor, incubation would be overkill... There's just > 7 Java classes, plus integration tests, and I didn't start from scratch, > but from a working solution. > > I'm going to create a GitHub repo for XVisitor in my own user space later > today or tomorrow so everyone can take a look, and if there are no > objections, a group admin could fork it into the org.ops4j space, set up a > Hudson job and all the rest... > > Of course, as usual, I'm happy to do any admin stuff myself, once I get > the required privileges and/or instructions from the senior project admins > :-) Sounds like a plan! At best set the project up exactly like how you would like to have it appear in the ops4j space it best (including naming and all that). "Senior Project Admins" .. tsss ;) > > > Best regards, > Harald > > ______________________________**_________________ > general mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ops4j.org/**mailman/listinfo/general<http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general> > -- Toni Menzel Source <http://tonimenzel.com>
_______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
