RE: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-10 Thread Danny Angus

Not necessarily true, I've worked on applications where a servers ability to
dynamically create M$ documents is a cool feature, imagine a servelet which
returned an xls workbook reporting on data from an ODBC datasource (maybe
sales figures or contact details), people in M$ centered offices lap that
up, particularly if it can include VBS macros providing an update path and
other client-server features.
There you have a client's (admitedly simple) route into a non M$ environment
which doesn't frighten the children or use ODBC or any non M$ application on
the client side.
d.

 Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:

Sure, but the flip side of that is it's really more of a
client-ish tool, as
from what I gather it's focus is desktop-software documents (MSFT).

Important, and rather cool that someone did it,  but not strictly
serverside.  Of course, Jakarta isn't strictly server-side either.



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache]

2002-01-07 Thread Stefano Mazzocchi

Ted Husted wrote:

 At this point, I'm reconciled to do more work on the Jakata site using
 XML in the old-fashioned way.

I can't resonate more with your feelings. That's exactly what made me
started the 'forrest' effort: the coherence on xml.apache.org and the
ease of update has been slowly falling apart until now when people can't
even run in on their machines without getting fonts problems (yeah,
blocked by fonts problems! go figure!)
 
 We have some unratified guidelines that expand on the ones (you?)
 originally set down.

No, that wasn't me to edit that page, even if much was taken from my
java.apache constitution (as you indicate below), which on my side, took
from the old dev.apache.org guidelines for [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 http://jakarta.apache.org/site/proposal.html
 
 If you were able to review them, I would of course very much like to
 have your comments before making a final update and calling for a vote.

I'm honored. I'll do it ASAP.
 
 I would also like to add more rationale for some of the guidelines. The
 recent dicussion regarding coding conventions had less to do with the
 conventions themselves, and more to do with why we even have
 conventions. (And having conventions, why don't we enforce them.)

Good point.
 
 As Jakarta grows, it becomes more and more important that we have better
 ways to introduce peoole into the fold. Right now, there is a tendency
 to make someone a Committer and let them find their own way around. At
 this time, I'd like to go to work on a Committer's guidebook that would
 help explain how things are done (starting with How to do a Release --
 which raised the JAR discussion the other day).

Oh, gosh, you are probably unaware of the fact that I'm the one that
continously pisses people off on the ASF member list (unfortunately
private) about having those 'committer guidelines' up and running. James
Davidson and I were the one who made the page on how to setup your SSH
tunnel for CVS.

Yes, this is the right direction, but people must commit to keep those
guidelines up 2 date and many people (expecially apache root's) failed
miserably to do it.

Also we must make those easy to find.

Again, Forrest will help.
 
 I think the real solution to improving the noise:signal ratio is to move
 away from the oral (email) tradition we have now, and move back toward
 providing more grassroots documentation, as you did in the preamble to
 the original constition.
 
 http://java.apache.org/main/constitution.html

Absolutely.
 
 An actual history of Jakarta might also be useful to give people a
 better perspective. Here's one passages I tucked away (to be joined by
 your own snippets of late).
 
 Pier to Jon - Thu, 21 Dec 2000
  We've traveled a long
  way together, from my very first steps in open-source land in January 1998,
  to our marvelous meeting at the first ApacheCON in October 1998, the Jakarta
  room meeting, all JavaONEs, and all we did together to bring this project
  where it is right now.
 
 Pier again, same day
  And we, as the newly formed Apache Software Foundation, accepted that code
  in donation as a point of start for the Jakarta Project. I was there, in
  that meeting room, that day when we outlined how the process would have
  evolved, with Jon, Stefano and Brian. And I was there, on stage at JavaONE,
  when Patricia Sueltz announced the spinoff of the project againg with Jon,
  Stefano and Brian. If that has been a wrong decision, we four are the people
  to blame...
 
 A coherent history might help with many of the questions about why we do
 things the way we do. (Or why we don't do some things at all.) I think
 clearly documenting the Apache Way would be an important first step to
 unifying the Apache Projects.

Great point. I absolutely agree.
 
 I would also like to personally commend Jon with his efforts to better
 document Jakarta. He has put a lot into the Web site (probably 90%), and
 we all owe him a great debt.

Oh, I never even thought about questioning this.

I personally owe everything to Jon: without his kind messages, I
wouldn't have remained around the community enough to get the 'apache
feeling' out of it.

Jon and I have very different technical views and very different ways of
doing software architectures and sometimes some friction develops, but
all the times I land in SFO, he's the first one who I call to hang out
with! :)

[yeah, people, the 'rude' Jon Stevens was the one who gave Pier and I
hospitality in his place when we came to ApacheCON 98 and we didn't have
a place to stay since we had to pay our own expenses]

Gosh, Ted, you're right, we should write this history down someplace and
let people know how we came here.

-- 
Stefano Mazzocchi  One must still have chaos in oneself to be
  able to give birth to a dancing star.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friedrich Nietzsche




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   

RE: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache]

2002-01-07 Thread Paulo Gaspar

As a newbie (only 1.5 years around) I found the small bio posted by
Stefano on the Cocoon-dev list very interesting and instructive.

This post was triggered by curiosity and know-your-community concerns
that popped up in a couple of Cocoon-dev threads less than 2 months
ago. IMO, the fact that it is written in the first person only helps.

To ease the task of searching for it, I am just attaching it. Maybe
Ted and others can use it as an historic source.


Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar


 -Original Message-
 From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 3:48 PM


 Ted Husted wrote:

  At this point, I'm reconciled to do more work on the Jakata site using
  XML in the old-fashioned way.

 I can't resonate more with your feelings. That's exactly what made me
 started the 'forrest' effort: the coherence on xml.apache.org and the
 ease of update has been slowly falling apart until now when people can't
 even run in on their machines without getting fonts problems (yeah,
 blocked by fonts problems! go figure!)

  We have some unratified guidelines that expand on the ones (you?)
  originally set down.

 No, that wasn't me to edit that page, even if much was taken from my
 java.apache constitution (as you indicate below), which on my side, took
 from the old dev.apache.org guidelines for [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  http://jakarta.apache.org/site/proposal.html
 
  If you were able to review them, I would of course very much like to
  have your comments before making a final update and calling for a vote.

 I'm honored. I'll do it ASAP.

  I would also like to add more rationale for some of the guidelines. The
  recent dicussion regarding coding conventions had less to do with the
  conventions themselves, and more to do with why we even have
  conventions. (And having conventions, why don't we enforce them.)

 Good point.

  As Jakarta grows, it becomes more and more important that we have better
  ways to introduce peoole into the fold. Right now, there is a tendency
  to make someone a Committer and let them find their own way around. At
  this time, I'd like to go to work on a Committer's guidebook that would
  help explain how things are done (starting with How to do a Release --
  which raised the JAR discussion the other day).

 Oh, gosh, you are probably unaware of the fact that I'm the one that
 continously pisses people off on the ASF member list (unfortunately
 private) about having those 'committer guidelines' up and running. James
 Davidson and I were the one who made the page on how to setup your SSH
 tunnel for CVS.

 Yes, this is the right direction, but people must commit to keep those
 guidelines up 2 date and many people (expecially apache root's) failed
 miserably to do it.

 Also we must make those easy to find.

 Again, Forrest will help.

  I think the real solution to improving the noise:signal ratio is to move
  away from the oral (email) tradition we have now, and move back toward
  providing more grassroots documentation, as you did in the preamble to
  the original constition.
 
  http://java.apache.org/main/constitution.html

 Absolutely.

  An actual history of Jakarta might also be useful to give people a
  better perspective. Here's one passages I tucked away (to be joined by
  your own snippets of late).
 
  Pier to Jon - Thu, 21 Dec 2000
   We've traveled a long
   way together, from my very first steps in open-source land in
 January 1998,
   to our marvelous meeting at the first ApacheCON in October
 1998, the Jakarta
   room meeting, all JavaONEs, and all we did together to bring
 this project
   where it is right now.
 
  Pier again, same day
   And we, as the newly formed Apache Software Foundation,
 accepted that code
   in donation as a point of start for the Jakarta Project. I
 was there, in
   that meeting room, that day when we outlined how the process
 would have
   evolved, with Jon, Stefano and Brian. And I was there, on
 stage at JavaONE,
   when Patricia Sueltz announced the spinoff of the project
 againg with Jon,
   Stefano and Brian. If that has been a wrong decision, we four
 are the people
   to blame...
 
  A coherent history might help with many of the questions about why we do
  things the way we do. (Or why we don't do some things at all.) I think
  clearly documenting the Apache Way would be an important first step to
  unifying the Apache Projects.

 Great point. I absolutely agree.

  I would also like to personally commend Jon with his efforts to better
  document Jakarta. He has put a lot into the Web site (probably 90%), and
  we all owe him a great debt.

 Oh, I never even thought about questioning this.

 I personally owe everything to Jon: without his kind messages, I
 wouldn't have remained around the community enough to get the 'apache
 feeling' out of it.

 Jon and I have very different technical views and very different ways of
 doing software architectures and sometimes some friction develops, but
 all the 

RE: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @apache]

2002-01-06 Thread Paulo Gaspar

Here we go again,

 -Original Message-
 From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 4:45 AM


 Playing Devil's advocate.  I think it's fair to push back on adding things
 to Jakarta...

 On 1/5/02 9:53 PM, Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  Please read these posts and then tell me where you're not clear?
 
  http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg02681.html

 Isn't it fair to guess that the majority of your server side use would be
 reading documents for presentation, indexing, searching?

WHY for presentation? Most of the time you would batch convert Word and
Excel docs to HTML if needed, and there are specialized tools for that.

 However, you point out in the above link that the thing that makes POI
 special is it's ability to *write*?  What's the % of mainly writing to
 mainly reading on the serverside?

As mentioned in my previous posting, it is JUST like Velocity writing
HTML.


  http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg02685.html

 Paulo might use VB to make a client side app, but I wouldn't if I wanted
 portability, especially if I was looking to the handheld or embedded
 application that could access a document remotely...

Are there many uses for writing Word/Excel documents in a client-side
device that has not Word or Excel installed???

And AFAIK, if you have Word and Excel, you have at least some Basic
scripting... but maybe you do not have Java.

 ...


Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @apache]

2002-01-06 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr.

On 1/6/02 12:18 PM, Paulo Gaspar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Here we go again,

Alas.

 
 -Original Message-
 From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 4:45 AM
 
 
 Playing Devil's advocate.  I think it's fair to push back on adding things
 to Jakarta...
 
 On 1/5/02 9:53 PM, Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 Please read these posts and then tell me where you're not clear?
 
 http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg02681.html
 
 Isn't it fair to guess that the majority of your server side use would be
 reading documents for presentation, indexing, searching?
 
 WHY for presentation? Most of the time you would batch convert Word and
 Excel docs to HTML if needed, and there are specialized tools for that.

'presentation' in the sense of 'reading data out to show in some manner',
not 'on the desktop'.

 
 However, you point out in the above link that the thing that makes POI
 special is it's ability to *write*?  What's the % of mainly writing to
 mainly reading on the serverside?
 
 As mentioned in my previous posting, it is JUST like Velocity writing
 HTML.
 

Huh?  You have to explain that a little more - I don't quite get it.

 
 http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg02685.html
 
 Paulo might use VB to make a client side app, but I wouldn't if I wanted
 portability, especially if I was looking to the handheld or embedded
 application that could access a document remotely...
 
 Are there many uses for writing Word/Excel documents in a client-side
 device that has not Word or Excel installed???

You might find this unbelieveable, but not everyone works on a computer that
runs an operating system that has Word or Excel available.

 
 And AFAIK, if you have Word and Excel, you have at least some Basic
 scripting... but maybe you do not have Java.
 
 ...
 
 
 Have fun,
 Paulo Gaspar
 
 
 --
 To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
System and Software Consulting
He who throws mud only loses ground. - Fat Albert


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




RE: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @apache]

2002-01-06 Thread Paulo Gaspar

Again...

 -Original Message-
 From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 6:14 PM
 
 On 1/6/02 12:11 PM, Paulo Gaspar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 ... Lots of is it server or is it client talk ...

I just mean that sometimes saying that something is server-side or 
client-side just makes no sense.

As Ceki puts it, maybe JMeter is one of the few clearly server-side 
products in Jakarta. 

BTW... is Log4J server-side?
=;o)


  From what I read, POI is an API that accesses data in XLS files...
  Theres a huge difference.
  
  And Cocoon isn't part of Jakarta, is it? :)
  
  JUST because it is XML centric, which POI is not.
 
 Right.  I wasn't advocating it going to XML-land - it doesn't 
 seem to belong there either.

It am still not aware of any valid argument that clearly states why
it does not belong to Jakarta or why it belongs.

It is just like BCEL or Log4J - some people wanted those projects here
because they had use for them or were already using them.

Nothing to do with serversideness!!!

  
  BTW, do you know they use Velocity for something???
 
 Who, POI?

NO! Cocoon!

 ...

Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @apache]

2002-01-06 Thread Peter Donald

On Mon, 7 Jan 2002 04:14, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
  BTW, do you know they use Velocity for something???

 Who, POI?

Cocoon have a VelocityGenerator (the first stage in their XML transformation 
pipeline).

-- 
Cheers,

Pete

--
you've made a dangerous leap right over common 
sense, like some kind of metaphysical Evil Knievel
--

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




RE: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment]POI@apache]

2002-01-06 Thread Andrew C. Oliver

Answer inline

 -Original Message-
 From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 3:53 AM
   ...
 
 I can not express this POV better than Linus did in posts reported
by 
 this article:
  http://kerneltrap.org/article.php?sid=398
 
 Any corporation organizizes things and I do not see better user 
 understanding there.
  My viewpoint is a bit different then Linus on some things.  

Keep in mind that Linus does not favor complete anarchy, as is obvious
from the grip he has on Linux.

Yes.  Linus has different beliefs in release management.  I'm a bit more
disciplined in style.  Don't get me wrong, Linus is like my idol and
all, just I bet I'm far more likely to do a sequence diagram or write
documentation.  We have different viewpoints on a lot of different
things.  Yet I don't care to maintain as tight of control over POI.  I'd
exert my say if say someone wanted to do the equivalent of maybe embed X
inside the kernel (like the whole thing) directly, but mostly I don't
try to direct things quite as much in some areas.  

The point is that too many restrictions are bad. The problem is to 
find out what too many is.

IMO, things can be improved but the main problem is not lack of rigid 
discipline. 

true, I wasn't meaning to say rigid discipline would.

As an example of too many or too less restrictions, I believe that:
 - forcing every project to follow the same code conventions would be
   counterproductive;

Completely and TOTALLY agree.

 - forcing each project to have explicit code conventions and follow 
   them would be just fine.

As long as those projects can have explicitly lax coding conventions in
places where others would be more rigid.  (POI - write good code.  be
self consistent and we all kinda agree that embedded ternary operators
is the most evil sin of all)

It is good to have diversity. There is the cross pollination effect and
there is also the fact that what one group things is better is not so 
sure that it should be imposed.

+1
 
 Besides, there is no such thing as an Open Source external customer.
 Those that contribute to it (the authors and even noisy guys like
me)
 ARE the customers.
  People PAY Open Source by participating. If something is wrong FIX
IT!
  I don't completely agree with you on that.  Some contributions to
Open
 Source are less quantifiable than others.  I see I'm a bit
 morecommunistic.  I'm so far the the left on this that I'm on the
 right?  

I doubt you are that different.

*Looks down at his cookie monster slippers*

 is not withing to POI's mission, that won't fly.  (There will be NO
GUI
 components in POI)... If they feel like working on a feature that I
just
 don't think is in our critical path...go at it.  

So, you try to keep people happy but you are not so communistic that
you
make everybody happy (which would be crazy, I agree).

Which reminds me of an Abe Lincoln quite.
 
 Anyhow I contributed ideas.  Take them for what they were.  They were
 NOT complaints.  Apache is the most healthy opensource group there
is.
  (its healthier then GNU IMHO)

I also believe so, of course.


 
 You probably know what I am talking about since POI is Open Source.
  POI is opensource, there are some differences of opinion between you
and
 I on who the contributers are.  To me:
  User: doesn't submit patches, but uses the software.  The more
people
 who USE POI the better and healthier POI is.
  For example.  A user the other day sent a bug.  He had an toasted
XLS
 file.  It had confidential data in it so he couldn't contribute a
 sample.  I talked him through running HSSF through a debugger and he
 found the problem.  HSSF 1.0.1 can't handle cells with strings over  
 15,000 characters long if they don't occur early in the file.  (there
 is a static string table and it is kinda blocked or paged).

 You are talking about users that contribute something to the projects:
they test it, report problems and help making it more solid that way.

 I still do not see any difference in your opinion.

Gotcha.  It often does not seem that many agree with this viewpoint.

In my posting I even including this paragraph:
  Besides, there is no such thing as an Open Source external customer. 
  Those that contribute to it (the authors and even noisy guys like me)
  ARE the customers.

Noisy guys like me means I only contributed a couple of patches but I
still like to think that the some of the ideas I dumped on Jakarta
lists
are worth something (hey, some of them did result on something besides 
flames).

+1  Gotcha.  I missed your meaning before.

 One way or the other, I am involved. I am NO external customer. Even
if
 many times just with ideas, I try to influence and contribute to the 
evolution of the products I use.

yup.

And when I see no possibility of changing the product in the way it 
suites my needs, I fork and still save a lot of work.

Like I said.  I see the fork as something to generally be avoided unless
there is 

Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache]

2002-01-05 Thread Sam Ruby

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:

 In my mind, all this long trail of thoughs yields the following
 equation:

 metacommunity size * community coherence * individual freedom =
 constant

 in result, if we unify the two projects, we double the size of the
 metacommunity and we must pay the price of decreased coherence and/or
 decreased individual freedom.

So, if we half the community size we double the coherence and/or individual
freedom?  What happens if we half it again?

Hmmm.  I guess the optimum community size is 1.

Reductio ad Absurdum

I think this equation misses the important second order affects of
collaboration.

My feeling is that communities need a critical mass, as do
meta-communities.  I'm not sure what that size is, but in my mind the XML
project has not reached it.  And it is not just size that is the issue, it
is the presence (or lack) of people who cross pollinate ideas.  Within
Jakarta, this is being done on an ever increasing scale.

Perhaps a metric that would be more useful is to contemplate the size of
the intersection between the subscribers to any two mailing lists picked at
random.  Without looking, it is clear to me that however you choose to
quantify this metric, Jakarta would greatly exceed XML.

What you have observed lately has been a spike of activity on the general
mailing list.  One thread dealt with the ever popular coding style issues
(which unfortunately overwhelmed the more important underlying issue that
Jon was trying to get us to face).  The other thread dealt with the
intentionally high threshold that we have for accepting new Jakarta
projects.

Now for a thought experiment: if POI were added to Jakarta, would this
metric overall increase or decrease for Jakarta?  If POI were added to XML,
would the metric overall increase or decrease?

Ignoring the fact that the following are clearly related, which is more
important: community coherence or mission coherence?

- Sam Ruby


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache]

2002-01-05 Thread Micael Padraig Og mac Grene

At 10:40 AM 1/5/02 -0500, you wrote:
I would also like to personally commend Jon with his efforts to better
document Jakarta. He has put a lot into the Web site (probably 90%), and
we all owe him a great debt.

-Ted.


Despite Jon's candid remarks, as you put it, Ted, I too would like him to 
know that I join a throng in saying thanks.

- Micael


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




RE: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-05 Thread Andrew C. Oliver

Hi Paulo,


IMO Andrew puts the finger on why POI is only used on a server.


good!

One of my 2 interests (the other is indexing) 
on POI is exactly the 
typical one he describes:
 - I want to be able build Word and Excel documents on a Web Server 
   without going back to use MS IIS and COM automation.

(... even because using COM to control Word/Excel in a multithreaded
application sounds VERY problematic and all the other methods I can
think of are some other kind of PITA.)


You got it exactly.  Feel free to join us on the poi-devel or
poi-general-users lists (http://poi.sourceforge.net).  Apparently many
people share your interest:  The POI project climbed to #4 on the charts
today.


Hey, for a client application, I would use Delphi or VB + COM in 
Windows and something around OpenOffice in Linux. 


Complete agreement.  For a client app where you know what your client is
(and with an office doc you probably know who your client is), there
would be little reason to use POI (other than the office automation API
in VB is kind of a pain to use because its based on programmaticly
simulating the user which can be painful).  I'm not sure there would be
a reason to use Java (most things could probably be done as a big fat
Excel macro for instance).

Hey! I am just finding out how much server side POI really is!!!


Glad that shined the light.  



Have fun,

Definitely!

Paulo Gaspar

Thanks!

-Andy

-- 
www.sourceforge.net/projects/poi - port of Excel format to java
http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4487555.html 
- fix java generics!


The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache]

2002-01-05 Thread Chris Duprat

Hello,
Each structure has a cost depending on his level of organization. I think
there is today to many project in the jakarta and the xml project. I feel
confuse about finding the right information at the right place. And I think
it's high time to merge xml and jakarta.
The way java is organizing code in package is rather simple and efficient,
maybe organizing project this way is the solution.
We should debate about this organization.
I propose some package organization :

XML(Xerces,Crimson)
XSL(Xalan,FOP)
SVG(Batik)
WebApps(Cocoon, JetSpeed...)
JSP (TagLibs)
FrameWork(Turbine, Avalon, Struts..)
Project Management (Ant, Slide)
Metric  Testing (Log4J, WatchDog)
ToolBox(ORO, RegExp, Lucene)
...
I'd like your opinion about it, which package with which existing project.

Ciao
Chris
-
agitateur depuis toujours
***


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache]

2002-01-05 Thread Ceki Gülcü

At 15:31 05.01.2002 +0100, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
[Snip]


In my mind, all this long trail of thoughs yields the following
equation:

 metacommunity size * community coherence * individual freedom = constant

This equation is misleading. Coherence and individual freedom are 
not inversely proportional, perhaps related but not inversely 
proportional. That much is certain. 
  
in result, if we unify the two projects, we double the size of the
metacommunity and we must pay the price of decreased coherence and/or
decreased individual freedom.

But are we sure the pros outweight the cons?

No, we can't be sure. The experiment cannot be undone and started
over. 

Anyway, contrary to my previous hints, I am unsure if having XML and
Jakarta would benefit either Jakarta or XML. If someone cares enough
about a particular XML project nothing keeps him/her from participating 
in that project.

IMHO, XML does not and will never have a community as long as two of
its most important projects directly compete with each other. The
success of one is related with the failure of the other. XML
Community? Won't happen in a million years. How the did Crimson
become an Apache project anyway?

Unity and coherence (the subject of this thread) are strongly related to
management and decision making. Since we don't have a manager, we must
have a healthy decision making process.

The current system of voting where each participant is granted veto
power is a system geared towards non-decision making. This was perhaps
one of the intentions of the founders of the ASF. Anyone know where -1
tradition came from?

My suggestion is institute a new tradition where members of the
community can make proposals which the community votes on.

Advantages: decisions can be made.
Disadvantages: decisions can be made.

The required majority for the adoption of proposals can be simple or
qualified. Even if the qualified majority is 3/4, this would be better
than the veto system we have today. Although a veto can be overridden
by a 3/4 majority, as far as I know, this has never happened in the
past.  Today someone voting -1 means end of discussion. 

I dare anyone to -1 that. Regards, Ceki


--
Ceki Gülcü - http://qos.ch



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache]

2002-01-05 Thread Ceki Gülcü


Chris,

I think you are confusing project categorization with project community. These things
are very much unrelated. Regards, Ceki

At 23:44 05.01.2002 +0100, you wrote:
Hello,
Each structure has a cost depending on his level of organization. I think
there is today to many project in the jakarta and the xml project. I feel
confuse about finding the right information at the right place. And I think
it's high time to merge xml and jakarta.
The way java is organizing code in package is rather simple and efficient,
maybe organizing project this way is the solution.
We should debate about this organization.
I propose some package organization :

XML(Xerces,Crimson)
XSL(Xalan,FOP)
SVG(Batik)
WebApps(Cocoon, JetSpeed...)
JSP (TagLibs)
FrameWork(Turbine, Avalon, Struts..)
Project Management (Ant, Slide)
Metric  Testing (Log4J, WatchDog)
ToolBox(ORO, RegExp, Lucene)
...
I'd like your opinion about it, which package with which existing project.

Ciao
Chris
-
agitateur depuis toujours
***


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
Ceki Gülcü - http://qos.ch



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache]

2002-01-05 Thread Sam Ruby

Ceki Gülcü wrote:

 IMHO, XML does not and will never have a community as long as two of
 its most important projects directly compete with each other. The
 success of one is related with the failure of the other. XML
 Community? Won't happen in a million years. How the did Crimson
 become an Apache project anyway?

Look closely, Xerces 2 is the designated successor to *both* Xerces 1 and
Crimson.  The developers *are* working together.  I won't pretend that
everything is 100% smooth sailing, but significant progress is being made.

 The required majority for the adoption of proposals can be simple or
 qualified. Even if the qualified majority is 3/4, this would be better
 than the veto system we have today. Although a veto can be overridden
 by a 3/4 majority, as far as I know, this has never happened in the
 past.  Today someone voting -1 means end of discussion.

 I dare anyone to -1 that. Regards, Ceki

The rules you describe don't look familiar to me.  The ones I am familiar
with are:

http://jakarta.apache.org/site/decisions.html
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/management.html

- Sam Ruby


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache]

2002-01-05 Thread Ceki Gülcü

At 18:02 05.01.2002 -0500, you wrote:
Ceki Gülcü wrote:

 IMHO, XML does not and will never have a community as long as two of
 its most important projects directly compete with each other. The
 success of one is related with the failure of the other. XML
 Community? Won't happen in a million years. How the did Crimson
 become an Apache project anyway?

Look closely, Xerces 2 is the designated successor to *both* Xerces 1 and
Crimson.  The developers *are* working together.  I won't pretend that
everything is 100% smooth sailing, but significant progress is being made.

Point well taken.

 The required majority for the adoption of proposals can be simple or
 qualified. Even if the qualified majority is 3/4, this would be better
 than the veto system we have today. Although a veto can be overridden
 by a 3/4 majority, as far as I know, this has never happened in the
 past.  Today someone voting -1 means end of discussion.

 I dare anyone to -1 that. Regards, Ceki

The rules you describe don't look familiar to me.  The ones I am familiar
with are:

http://jakarta.apache.org/site/decisions.html
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/management.html

My mistake. I was always under the impression that new project creation
required a 3/4 vote *and* no binding vetoes (which I admit makes no sense).
Thanks for the clarification. Ceki



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @apache]

2002-01-05 Thread Jon Scott Stevens

on 1/5/02 3:02 PM, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Look closely, Xerces 2 is the designated successor to *both* Xerces 1 and
 Crimson.  The developers *are* working together.  I won't pretend that
 everything is 100% smooth sailing, but significant progress is being made.

Yea...just like Tomcat 3x and Tomcat 4x...suuueee...

-jon


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @apache]

2002-01-05 Thread Andrew C. Oliver

Not that I should have much of a role in this discussion but I'd like to
contribute some thoughts stemming from an offline discussion I had.

I think this discussion is still missing the point.  There are a lot of
outsider articles on what is wrong with Apache these days, most of
them refer to the total disinterest (by many developers in the projects)
on the market meaning what do the user's actually want.  I'd say this
is a component.  (Please take this as somewhat of an outsider who has a
lot of experience with Apache work-products)  (as a symptom of this:
Apache is OBVIOUSLY a better Web Server, TOMCAT is obviously a better
App server of sorts, and though not a apache project JBOSS is a great
enterprise serverso why is IIS gaining ground despite its overall
suckiness?)

The second component is an overall lack of unity-of-purpose. 
XML.apache.org hasn't reached a critical mass and in my opinion may
never because it does have unity-of-purpose and I think that is part of
why Stefano recommended I approach Jakarta first.  

POI has a lot to contribute to XML.apache.org but it has a lot of stuff
that *would* contribute more to Jakarta's purpose if it had one.  This
isn't a slam, hear me out. 

The Apache group had a unity of purpose early on.  They had a product: a
webserver.  Everything that Apache did had something directly to do with
that product.  Some things were semi-independent so subgroups seemed
like the best way to handle it.  

Java-Apache had this unity-of-purpose:  Java on Apache.  Well for Java
on Apache you need a mod to handle that (since everything is a mod in
Apache) so you get mod-jserv, of course you have a lot of things that
roll in and out of that based on serverside components for developing
with your java mod.  But you have unity-of-purpose. (or at least for a
time)

What is Jakarta's mission?  server side java stuff.  What is your
product (look at the homepage)whoa thats a big list of
subprojects...  Wait is ant a server side java tool?  Well..kinda sorta
(build server)... what kind of server-side java stuff.

XML.apache.org has a few well-defined products with the main one
being Cocoon.  This may change slightly as the web services thing comes
to a head (as the speaker coordinator for my JUG www.trijug.org I can
tell you this is coming to a head) and more web-servicey things happen
with XML rather than publishing (Cocoon) and maybe at that time there
should be a webservices.apache.org (and webservices will expand beyond
XML), but for the moment you've got real products and a
unity-of-purpose.  (Which parts of POI fit well into..the cocoon 2
serializers for instance and others do not)

So what do most people (users) come to Jakarta for?  Tomcat.  Why?  Go
to the front page.  A big rattled on list of componentsIf I don't
know what I'm looking for suffice to say I won't find it.  If I say
Tomcat the general IT population knows what I'm talking about.  (and
the rest know what I mean if I say the successor to JServ)

Here's my 2c worth (and unless asked its the only thing I'll contribute
to this discussion):

Defined unity of purpose: sever side java is now too fuzzy of a
mission...what are your products and categorize them:

application server (tomcat)
build and development tools (ant/log4j/etc)
document management and publishing (lucene, POI, etc)
application frameworks (avalon, struts)

The Apache brand is worth a lot.  You say Linux in a corporate
environment you get a dirty look (once upon a time we just said
Solaris-clone and installed linux to avoid political battles ;-) ),
you say Apache you get a less dirty look.  (You're still a radical but
IBM and Sun said you're an okay radical).

Jakarta needs to do some actual PROJECT work.  Go in and pull these
disparate components into distributions (Redhat doesn't point you to
their website to download X, and then GLIB and go try and put it
together yourself...not that Jakarta should be redhat, but the point
being having distributions).  This helps create unity of purpose as
things start going into distributions and distributions generate
requirements and needs which roll into features.

 I think this equation misses the important second order affects of
 collaboration.

My feeling is that communities need a critical mass, as do
meta-communities.  I'm not sure what that size is, but in my mind the
XML
project has not reached it.  And it is not just size that is the issue,
it
is the presence (or lack) of people who cross pollinate ideas.  Within
Jakarta, this is being done on an ever increasing scale.

I think you need to have points.  Both to discussions and to work.  In
the POI project.  Try this:  submit to the poi-devel list (and Marc, Ken
and the lurkers may not be monitoring so the experiment would be fair)
a proposal or patch to do something obviously outside of POI's mission
(crack those MS file formats right open, provide apis and XML publishing
utils for those formats)  I bet you you'll get a unified thanks,

RE: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @apache]

2002-01-05 Thread Paulo Gaspar

Biting the bait:

Maybe you and me are following different lists Jon.

AFAIK there is cooperation between Tomcat 3x and Tomcat 4x people.

I sure hope we will have a Tomcat 4 at least as nice to use as 3.3 is
at the moment. I am sure that most Tomcat 3.x users will upgrade as
soon as they feel confident about that being the case. It is possible
that many already did it.

Most 3.3 supporters have no emotional attachments to either the 3.3 or
the 4.x code base. Many of us just believed 3.3 was the shortest path
to a production quality Tomcat.

_Maybe_ there was more people with other interests on the 4.x side.

Either way, the main focus is on 4.x now and I do not see any ongoing 
flame wars on the Tomcat lists. Everybody wants its success.


IMO it is better to stop feeding the flaming and let it die.


Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar


 -Original Message-
 From: Jon Scott Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 12:37 AM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI
 @apache]
 
 
 on 1/5/02 3:02 PM, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  Look closely, Xerces 2 is the designated successor to *both* 
 Xerces 1 and
  Crimson.  The developers *are* working together.  I won't pretend that
  everything is 100% smooth sailing, but significant progress is 
 being made.
 
 Yea...just like Tomcat 3x and Tomcat 4x...suuueee...
 
 -jon


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




RE: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @apache]

2002-01-05 Thread Paulo Gaspar

Hi Andrew,


Before trying to organizize too much how Open Source development works,
maybe you should consider that impositions of organization and discipline
could kill the Golden Eggs Chicken.

I can not express this POV better than Linus did in posts reported by 
this article:
http://kerneltrap.org/article.php?sid=398


Any corporation organizizes things and I do not see better user 
understanding there.


Besides, there is no such thing as an Open Source external customer. 
Those that contribute to it (the authors and even noisy guys like me)
ARE the customers.

People PAY Open Source by participating. If something is wrong FIX IT!

(Ok! I confess I learned this stuff mostly from Jon.)


If you do not like an Open Source product as it is, contribute (fight)
to change it. If most of the project owners do not let you, FORK. At 
least you can learn a lot and save a lot of work.

You probably know what I am talking about since POI is Open Source.


For complex enough software, Winston Churchill's remarks about democracy
apply quite well to Open Source as we know it by rephrasing them a bit:

  Open Source is the worse form of developing complex software, except 
  all those others that have been tried.

(
The original Winston Churchill quote:
Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this 
world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or 
all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of 
Government except all those others that have been.
)


Relax and have fun, organic growing works or we wouldn't be here!
Paulo Gaspar



 -Original Message-
 From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 1:01 AM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI
 @apache]
 
 
 Not that I should have much of a role in this discussion but I'd like to
 contribute some thoughts stemming from an offline discussion I had.
 
 I think this discussion is still missing the point.  There are a lot of
 outsider articles on what is wrong with Apache these days, most of
 them refer to the total disinterest (by many developers in the projects)
 on the market meaning what do the user's actually want.  I'd say this
 is a component.  (Please take this as somewhat of an outsider who has a
 lot of experience with Apache work-products)  (as a symptom of this:
 Apache is OBVIOUSLY a better Web Server, TOMCAT is obviously a better
 App server of sorts, and though not a apache project JBOSS is a great
 enterprise serverso why is IIS gaining ground despite its overall
 suckiness?)
 
 The second component is an overall lack of unity-of-purpose. 
 XML.apache.org hasn't reached a critical mass and in my opinion may
 never because it does have unity-of-purpose and I think that is part of
 why Stefano recommended I approach Jakarta first.  
 
 POI has a lot to contribute to XML.apache.org but it has a lot of stuff
 that *would* contribute more to Jakarta's purpose if it had one.  This
 isn't a slam, hear me out. 
 
 The Apache group had a unity of purpose early on.  They had a product: a
 webserver.  Everything that Apache did had something directly to do with
 that product.  Some things were semi-independent so subgroups seemed
 like the best way to handle it.  
 
 Java-Apache had this unity-of-purpose:  Java on Apache.  Well for Java
 on Apache you need a mod to handle that (since everything is a mod in
 Apache) so you get mod-jserv, of course you have a lot of things that
 roll in and out of that based on serverside components for developing
 with your java mod.  But you have unity-of-purpose. (or at least for a
 time)
 
 What is Jakarta's mission?  server side java stuff.  What is your
 product (look at the homepage)whoa thats a big list of
 subprojects...  Wait is ant a server side java tool?  Well..kinda sorta
 (build server)... what kind of server-side java stuff.
 
 XML.apache.org has a few well-defined products with the main one
 being Cocoon.  This may change slightly as the web services thing comes
 to a head (as the speaker coordinator for my JUG www.trijug.org I can
 tell you this is coming to a head) and more web-servicey things happen
 with XML rather than publishing (Cocoon) and maybe at that time there
 should be a webservices.apache.org (and webservices will expand beyond
 XML), but for the moment you've got real products and a
 unity-of-purpose.  (Which parts of POI fit well into..the cocoon 2
 serializers for instance and others do not)
 
 So what do most people (users) come to Jakarta for?  Tomcat.  Why?  Go
 to the front page.  A big rattled on list of componentsIf I don't
 know what I'm looking for suffice to say I won't find it.  If I say
 Tomcat the general IT population knows what I'm talking about.  (and
 the rest know what I mean if I say the successor to JServ)
 
 Here's my 2c worth (and unless asked its the only thing I'll contribute
 to this discussion

Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @apache]

2002-01-05 Thread Ted Husted

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
  It's my understanding that Apache Projects' unity of purpose is
 
  to encourage a collaborative, consensus-based development process
 
 What does that exactly mean?

Perhaps Stefano's original preamble said it best

http://java.apache.org/main/constitution.html

Unlike other open source projects where an individual rules the project
as a benevolent dictator, the Java Apache Project form is government is
based on merit: everyone who deserves it get the right to vote and
everyone who is able to vote participates in the ruling of the project.
This kind of  government helps in maintaining the project going even
when core individuals leave the project or don't have enough time. The
project itself is like the ancient Greek Agora idea, where everybody
helps and who deserves it decide. This meritocracy allows the project to
be very flexible toward people presence and allows fast and safe changes
in the core group since who decides is always who is more involved and
cares the most. 

I believe that everything else here, the projects, the subprojects, are
just a means to serve the end of development by meritocracy. 


-- Ted Husted, Husted dot Com, Fairport NY USA.
-- Building Java web applications with Struts.
-- Tel +1 585 737-3463.
-- Web http://www.husted.com/struts/

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI@apache]

2002-01-05 Thread Andrew C. Oliver

On 1/5/02 7:28 PM, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


I am not trying to be combative - I have watched this thread (and
participated) with growing discomfort.  I have to say that I think that
bringing XML and Jakarta together might destroy the thing we are
supposedly
trying to 'save' (again, I don't get the problem...), namely the
community
that each group has.  Larger isn't always better.

I kinda agree with you on that.

  I also think we are more than ready for a POI vote, if someone were
to
 post an actual proposal, including the list of committers.
 In that proposal, can it be argued why it belongs here?  I have tried
to sit
on the fence, and I am glad Stefano will step up to champion the
project,
but I also think that if he scope of Jakarta is confusing now, adding a
vendor-specific desktop document API (granted, with server-side uses)
will
add to it.

There was recent talk for other clearly client projects to be added,
with
the same apparent quality of code and health of community - why not
bundle
the two as a seed for a new Apache client-focused project to be a peer
to
jakarta and XML and ...?  If you have used any of the pure Java IDE's
lately, it's clear that Java has indeed matured enough for use on the
desktop, and initiatives on other client-side devices such as phones,
PDA's,
etc make for a very rich opportunity for Apache.  Further, meta-API
initiatives like Liberty which span both server and client (of all
types)
are clearly in Apache's interest, so I believe that a client-focused
Apache
project is appropriate for that reason as well.


Maybe its not yet time for a vote.  Let me state this again and make it
very clear.  POI has many users and many uses.  No one I know of is
using POI on the client.  POI is as client-side as Tomcat is. (Tomcat is
used by Netbeans a pure Java-IDE on the client!).  HTML is for use on
the client right?  So is a library that outputs in HTML is clientside or
serverside?  Cocoon publishes documents that are generally read on the
client right? 

Please read these posts and then tell me where you're not clear?

http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg02681.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg02685.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg02690.html

POI::HSSF reads or generates XLS files and is nearly always used on the
server .  OF all POI's users not one person is using it on the client. 
Please check out http://poi.sourceforge.net.  The page describes its
usage


-Andy

-- 
www.sourceforge.net/projects/poi - port of Excel format to java
http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4487555.html 
- fix java generics!


The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @apache]

2002-01-05 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr.

On 1/5/02 9:53 PM, Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On 1/5/02 7:28 PM, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 
 I am not trying to be combative - I have watched this thread (and
 participated) with growing discomfort.  I have to say that I think that
 bringing XML and Jakarta together might destroy the thing we are
 supposedly
 trying to 'save' (again, I don't get the problem...), namely the
 community
 that each group has.  Larger isn't always better.
 
 I kinda agree with you on that.

Ted didn't write that.  I did.


 
 I also think we are more than ready for a POI vote, if someone were
 to
 post an actual proposal, including the list of committers.
 In that proposal, can it be argued why it belongs here?  I have tried
 to sit
 on the fence, and I am glad Stefano will step up to champion the
 project,
 but I also think that if he scope of Jakarta is confusing now, adding a
 vendor-specific desktop document API (granted, with server-side uses)
 will
 add to it.
 
 There was recent talk for other clearly client projects to be added,
 with
 the same apparent quality of code and health of community - why not
 bundle
 the two as a seed for a new Apache client-focused project to be a peer
 to
 jakarta and XML and ...?  If you have used any of the pure Java IDE's
 lately, it's clear that Java has indeed matured enough for use on the
 desktop, and initiatives on other client-side devices such as phones,
 PDA's,
 etc make for a very rich opportunity for Apache.  Further, meta-API
 initiatives like Liberty which span both server and client (of all
 types)
 are clearly in Apache's interest, so I believe that a client-focused
 Apache
 project is appropriate for that reason as well.
 

I also wrote that, not Ted.

 
 Maybe its not yet time for a vote.  Let me state this again and make it
 very clear.  POI has many users and many uses.  No one I know of is
 using POI on the client.

Maybe you have some marketing problems? :)

 POI is as client-side as Tomcat is.

Why do you say that?  It is used on the server side, and that's fantastic,
but in my opinion (note that I recognize I am  a complete outsider to your
project who would be defined as a user) it seems client side.

If I had a need for something like this (and I bet I will at some point),
and I had the choice to look at either

  a)  jakarta, the apache java server-side focused project or
 
  b)  floccinoccinihilipilificator*, the apache java client-side project


I would choose b), as I think of word and excel as a client-side thingy.  No
matter that my use is server-side...


 (Tomcat is
 used by Netbeans a pure Java-IDE on the client!).  HTML is for use on
 the client right?

Yep.  But its a markup definition, not an API implementation.

 So is a library that outputs in HTML is clientside or
 serverside? 

Serverside generally, as the canonical model of HTML use is the web, with a
clear delineation of server and client.  However, it indeed has clientside
uses - take for example any help system that outputs HTML within a
monolithic desktop application.

Conversely, I would argue that Excel is a totally client-side technology,
and therefore a library that works with XLS files is clientside generally as
the canonical model of Excel is on the desktop.  However, it indeed has
serverside uses


 Cocoon publishes documents that are generally read on the
 client right? 

Yes, but it's more than an API, right?  (I don't know much about cocoon...)

From what I read, POI is an API that accesses data in XLS files...  Theres a
huge difference.

And Cocoon isn't part of Jakarta, is it? :)

I don't necessarily think that xml.apache.org is the right place either,
although I am not a member of that community in any way shape or form, so
that opinion is worth the bits through which it was transmitted.

I think that a client project peer to jakarta is still the right place, at
least worth discussing,  as we have the interesting temporal convergence of
the proposal of multiple client side projects when java on the client side
is becoming a much more interesting space to work.

 
 Please read these posts and then tell me where you're not clear?
 
 http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg02681.html
 http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg02685.html
 http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg02690.html

I will.

 
 POI::HSSF reads or generates XLS files and is nearly always used on the
 server .  OF all POI's users not one person is using it on the client.
 Please check out http://poi.sourceforge.net.  The page describes its
 usage

I will.

Note I spent years supporting Excel 'stuff' in the financial industry as
part of a project I led, and every user I knew was client-side.  You may
just be ahead of your time :)


-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
System and Software Consulting
We will be judged not by the monuments we build, but by the monuments we
destroy - 

Re: On unity and coherence [was Re: [Request For Comment] POI @apache]

2002-01-05 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr.

Playing Devil's advocate.  I think it's fair to push back on adding things
to Jakarta...

On 1/5/02 9:53 PM, Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 Please read these posts and then tell me where you're not clear?
 
 http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg02681.html

Isn't it fair to guess that the majority of your server side use would be
reading documents for presentation, indexing, searching?  However, you point
out in the above link that the thing that makes POI special is it's ability
to *write*?  What's the % of mainly writing to mainly reading on the
serverside?


 http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg02685.html

Paulo might use VB to make a client side app, but I wouldn't if I wanted
portability, especially if I was looking to the handheld or embedded
application that could access a document remotely...

 http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg02690.html

No comment, as it's an agreeable followup to the above.

-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
System and Software Consulting
We will be judged not by the monuments we build, but by the monuments we
destroy - Ada Louise Huxtable


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




RE: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-04 Thread Paulo Gaspar

 -Original Message-
 From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 3:16 PM
 
 ...

 Under the hood, I imagine that POI has more in common with things like
 FOP than things like Lucene.

I fail to understand why you assume this. Why?

I do not see POI making the generation of Word documents by FOP that 
much easier (it just takes care of a small bit of a very long path) but
I see it taking care of most of the work of indexing Word and Excel 
documents with Lucene.

Of course that maybe the Lucene guys do not want to support the indexing
of specific document formats...


Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-04 Thread Jon Scott Stevens

on 1/4/02 9:14 AM, Scott Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I can agree with Paulo, POI is about generating/reading documents with a
 particular foramt, and that is very useful to jakarta and xml.  I
 believe that if it came to Apache, if would belong under Jakarta, being
 a Java tool, and more specifically under commons, as it is just a
 component to be used with other products (ie Lucene) to gain
 functionality in context.
 
 Scott Sanders

I still don't see the point for bringing it to Jakarta. I think it is fine
where it is. They have good hosting, strong leadership, etc...

I'm not interested in bringing new projects into Jakarta when we are as
fucked up as we are today. It is utter anarchy here and I don't think that
is good. People can't even follow the rules we have *defined*.

People, it isn't about code standards, that is just the symptom of the
larger problem.

-jon


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-04 Thread Sam Ruby

Jon Stevens wrote:

 I'm not interested in bringing new projects into Jakarta when we are as
 fucked up as we are today. It is utter anarchy here and I don't think that
 is good. People can't even follow the rules we have *defined*.

 People, it isn't about code standards, that is just the symptom of the
 larger problem.

People not following the coding standards clearly is a bug.  The correct
fix is likely to be to reword the guidelines to make it clear that they
are, well, guidelines.  And perhaps to add working to encourage subprojects
to not only define standards, but also to explore viable ways to enforce
them.  Who knows, if somebody comes up with such a scheme (and I already
outlined what type of mechanism I would find acceptable), then perhaps we
would consider adopting it project wide.

OK, so cast in product terms and continuing the bug analogy.  Given the
proposed fix above, I would not consider it a stop ship issue.  In terms
of where I have chosen to invest my Apache related hours, I've made it
clear what types of issues I view as affecting the communities health.

So we've established that we've got a bug.  What should we do about it?

1) Perhaps we need to use the bug tracking system for PMC issues.  That
   would be a welcome improvement.  Anybody care to take this one?

2) Related to POI.  As long as they know the current state of Jakarta and
   can make an informed decision, and meet all the criteria described in
   http://jakarta.apache.org/site/newproject.html, then they have my +1.
   After all, what good is it to have published criteria which omits
   important details like Jon will block if he feels that Jakarta is
   fucked up today?  ;-)

   Oh, and Stefano's stewardship more than sufficiently meets that
   particular criteria in my book.

3) Related to bugs in general.  They happen.  Given that this is an all
   volunteer organization, perhaps more people should read
   http://jakarta.apache.org/site/understandingopensource.html .  My
   feeling is the sentiments that are expressed there apply equally well to
   the organization as a whole as they do to the status of any particular
   code base.

- Sam Ruby


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-04 Thread Ted Husted

Sam Ruby wrote:
 1) Perhaps we need to use the bug tracking system for PMC issues.  That
would be a welcome improvement.  Anybody care to take this one?

Makes sense to me -- Can we list it as PMC/Site2 ?

Do I have karma to add this to bugzilla myself?


-- Ted Husted, Husted dot Com, Fairport NY USA.
-- Building Java web applications with Struts.
-- Tel +1 585 737-3463.
-- Web http://www.husted.com/struts/

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-04 Thread Jon Scott Stevens

on 1/4/02 12:00 PM, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 2) Related to POI.  As long as they know the current state of Jakarta and
  can make an informed decision, and meet all the criteria described in
  http://jakarta.apache.org/site/newproject.html, then they have my +1.
  After all, what good is it to have published criteria which omits
  important details like Jon will block if he feels that Jakarta is
  fucked up today?  ;-)

Sam...not even funny... I never gave a vote so don't put words into my
mouth.

  Oh, and Stefano's stewardship more than sufficiently meets that
  particular criteria in my book.

Yea, after I wrangled it out of him. This whole fucked mess would have been
averted if Stefano had simply stepped up and said he would take stewardship.
Multiple times, I said that that was needed and it *finally* got stated by
him. So, shall another ballot be cast based on the latest information?

-jon


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-04 Thread Jon Scott Stevens

on 1/4/02 4:14 PM, Stefano Mazzocchi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 That makes me wonder about the real causes of this whole fucking mess
 and jakarta is fucked up today feelings of yours...

Of course. I forgot. I'm always wrong. Sorry.

-jon


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-03 Thread Peter Donald

On Thu, 3 Jan 2002 01:13, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
 I'm writing, at the recommendation of Stefano Mazzocchi, in hopes of
 drawing discussion and perhaps later a vote on the creation of a new
 Jakarta subproject based on the POI project (http://poi.sourceforge.net
  http://sourcefoge.net/projects/poi).

 The POI project consists of an API for reading and writing Microsoft's
 OLE2 Compound Document Format, the format used in Microsoft Office for
 Word and Excel documents, as well as ports of file formats based on
 it.

 Currently the project is composed into the following parts:

 POIFS - the pure java port of OLE 2 Compound Document format and the
 APIs for manipulating it.

 HSSF - the pure java port of Microsoft's Excel 97 File format (BIFF8)
 which is shared by all newer version of Excel as well.

 HSSFSerializer - Cocoon2 Serializer for HSSF.  It uses the same XML tag
 language as Gnumeric. [this will be donated and hosted in Cocoon]

 HSSFGenerator - commencing. [this will be part of Cocoon as well]

 HDF - commencing. A pure java port of Microsoft's Word 97 File Format
 which is shared by newer versions of Word as well.
...snip...

Sounds like a healthy project and a useful one (especially that HSSF stuff). 
It could fit into jakarta but in reality you need someone who is already an 
active member of the jakarta (or apache) community who is willing to champion 
it. Preferrably someone from the PMC. It may be a good idea to prod Stefano 
and see if he wants the job or perhaps someone else from cocoon.

-- 
Cheers,

Pete

*--*
The phrase computer literate user really means the person 
has been hurt so many times that the scar tissue is thick 
enough so he no longer feels the pain. 
   -- Alan Cooper, The Inmates are Running the Asylum 
*--*


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-03 Thread Peter Donald

On Thu, 3 Jan 2002 12:20, Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
 I'm also a bit surprised/disappointed that no other PMC members have
 commented...leaving me to be the one who has to say something *again*. I
 guess discussion about code formatting is taking up everyone's time/energy.

Some of us need more time to catch up with our mail ;)

-- 
Cheers,

Pete

-
Clarke's Third Law: Any technology distinguishable from 
magic is insufficiently advanced.
-


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-03 Thread Stefano Mazzocchi

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:

  Comments?
 
 Why is it appropriate for Jakarta?  That's the missing piece for me.  You
 said that the Cocoon community is excited about it, it could be important
 for data conversion in XML land...

The missing piece might be that this library is general enough to be
useful for other non necessarely XML-related subprojects.

-- 
Stefano Mazzocchi  One must still have chaos in oneself to be
  able to give birth to a dancing star.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friedrich Nietzsche




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-03 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr.

On 1/3/02 8:21 AM, Stefano Mazzocchi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
 
 Comments?
 
 Why is it appropriate for Jakarta?  That's the missing piece for me.  You
 said that the Cocoon community is excited about it, it could be important
 for data conversion in XML land...
 
 The missing piece might be that this library is general enough to be
 useful for other non necessarely XML-related subprojects.

Sure, but the flip side of that is it's really more of a client-ish tool, as
from what I gather it's focus is desktop-software documents (MSFT).

Important, and rather cool that someone did it,  but not strictly
serverside.  Of course, Jakarta isn't strictly server-side either.

geir

Stafano - can you subscribe please ? :)


-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
System and Software Consulting
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-03 Thread Jon Scott Stevens

on 1/3/02 5:31 AM, Stefano Mazzocchi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Exactly, ignoring M$ doesn't make it go away. I would say the opposite:
 there are tons of companies that base their document systems on M$
 software and would like to move to a more open world but they simply
 can't afford loosing the legacy data, so their managers decide to stick
 with M$ stuff.
 
 I would say that an exporting tool would rather do the opposite than
 encourage people to use M$ software, would encourage much more those who
 already use it to get away from it.

Based on the ranking that it is at now, keeping the project at sourceforget
clearly doesn't hurt it at all. I don't see that as a reason to move it to
the ASF.

 I'm not part of the Jakarta PMC (even if I've been) but I am an ASF
 member, which is even a higher status community-wise.

 Please, explain why you think my community sponsoring wouldn't be enough
 as a warranty for your vote.

You need to be willing to step up and help integrate their project into the
ASF. In other words, you (or another PMC member) needs to be willing to
watch over the project. Based on your past history of appearing and
disappearing (and the fact that you aren't a PMC member anymore), I'm not
confident that you will stick around long enough to make sure that they
integrate well and play well. What happens to their project when you decide
you don't feel like keeping an eye on them anymore?

-jon


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-03 Thread Jon Scott Stevens

on 1/3/02 10:15 AM, Paulo Gaspar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 As Andrew remarks, it goes quite well with Lucene. It opens the door
 to interesting synergies like:
 Slide + Lucene + HTML+PDF+Word+Excel = indexed repository of the
most popular
document formats!
 
 Have fun,
 Paulo Gaspar

There is no reason why those synergies can't work with a project that isn't
hosted at the ASF. As long as the licenses are compatible, projects should
work together just fine. I don't want the outside world to get the idea that
the ASF refuses to work with projects that are not within the ASF. That
would just plain suck.

-jon


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




RE: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-03 Thread Paulo Gaspar

You are right. I agree 100% with what you say here.

My remark is no argument.

Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar

 -Original Message-
 From: Jon Scott Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 7:35 PM


 on 1/3/02 10:15 AM, Paulo Gaspar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  As Andrew remarks, it goes quite well with Lucene. It opens the door
  to interesting synergies like:
  Slide + Lucene + HTML+PDF+Word+Excel = indexed repository of the
 most popular
 document formats!
 
  Have fun,
  Paulo Gaspar

 There is no reason why those synergies can't work with a project
 that isn't
 hosted at the ASF. As long as the licenses are compatible, projects should
 work together just fine. I don't want the outside world to get
 the idea that
 the ASF refuses to work with projects that are not within the ASF. That
 would just plain suck.

 -jon


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-02 Thread Jon Scott Stevens

on 1/2/02 6:13 AM, Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Sorry for the repost, I realized that I'd incorrectly labeled the
 post a reply (re:) and thought some folks may have not seen it because
 of that.  A quick update, POI is the #10 project on sourceforge this
 morning. 

It sounds like your project is plenty successful where it is.

 it makes good business sense for Apache as a whole.

Luckily Apache isn't a business, it is a non-profit volunteer organization.


I don't see any convincing reason to bring POI to Jakarta, unless I see that
you have a Jakarta PMC member champion your cause. Stefano's recommendation
to you isn't enough, he or someone else needs to be a committer and
interested in working and overseeing your project.

Did you read:

http://jakarta.apache.org/site/newproject.html

-jon


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-02 Thread Andrew C. Oliver

It sounds like your project is plenty successful where it is.

True.  However, because the vision for the project involves and would
benefit both directly and indirectly several existing Apache projects, I
feel it would be easier to collaborate if POI was a Jakarta project. 
The project will of course continue to succeed regardless of that.

 it makes good business sense for Apache as a whole.

Luckily Apache isn't a business, it is a non-profit volunteer
organization.

Excuse the phrasing I was attempting to be concise while getting the
following point across:  I see this project as potentially being of
great benefit to both Jakarta developers and users.  By business sense
I mean to say that greater collaboration would make it possible for
developers to select a Apache-based solution where they might presently
have to use proprietary technologies.  This could expand the user base
for the projects I mentioned as well as some of the xml.apache.org
projects.

I don't see any convincing reason to bring POI to Jakarta, unless I see
that
you have a Jakarta PMC member champion your cause. Stefano's
recommendation
to you isn't enough, he or someone else needs to be a committer and
interested in working and overseeing your project.

I see.  Thank you, for taking the time to consider the prospect and
provide feedback.

Did you read:

http://jakarta.apache.org/site/newproject.html

-jon

Yes I did.  The guidelines lay out how to propose/approve a project,
they do not seem to preclude proposing that members/commiters look at
the project, comment and consider a possibly supporting a proposal.  

My apologies if I've gone about that the wrong way.  What would you
suggest is the more appropriate way to do so?  

-Andy
-- 
www.sourceforge.net/projects/poi - port of Excel format to java

The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-02 Thread Stefano Mazzocchi

Please, keep me copied since I'm not currently subscribed to
general@jakarta

Andrew C. Oliver wrote:

 I don't see any convincing reason to bring POI to Jakarta, unless I see
 that
 you have a Jakarta PMC member champion your cause. Stefano's
 recommendation
 to you isn't enough, he or someone else needs to be a committer and
 interested in working and overseeing your project.

I do.

 I see.  Thank you, for taking the time to consider the prospect and
 provide feedback.
 
 Did you read:
 
 http://jakarta.apache.org/site/newproject.html
 
 -jon
 
 Yes I did.  The guidelines lay out how to propose/approve a project,
 they do not seem to preclude proposing that members/commiters look at
 the project, comment and consider a possibly supporting a proposal.

We initially talked about moving this code to xml.apache because I think
it would give us a great technical advantage, expecially for migrating
all the existing legacy data encoded in Office formats to the web.
Having the ability to edit XML content directly from M$ Office is
something that many of our users would *scream* to be able to do.

At the same time, I suggested Andrew to talk about it here instead of
xml.apache.org because importing/exporting Office formats back and
forward from XML is only one of the possible uses of such a technology
(indexing office formats using Lucene is another darn good example of
use that currently requires big bucks commercial software!)

 My apologies if I've gone about that the wrong way.  What would you
 suggest is the more appropriate way to do so?

Interpreting Jon's words with the provided context as I know him, he is
afraid of you guys lacking the necessary community management skills
that are required in all Apache projects in order to keep the process
going and probably didn't see the importance of such a codebase under
the jakarta mission.

Whether or not this codebase is big/strong/good/sane/future-proof enough
to be a full jakarta subproject, I don't know, up to you to decide, but
we have:

 1) a working codebase licensed under an ASF-compatible license and
willing to be donated to the ASF along with copyright and all that.
 2) another Apache community (Cocoon's) *very* excited about integrating
this technology
 3) two very active developers (the sourceforge logs tell us about it)
 4) a sponsoring ASF member (myself) willing to take care about helping
bootstrapping the community.

Reading the current guidelines, community-wise, I see no obstacles in
the creation of such a subproject.

Technically speaking, since POI is more or less a codec library (not
useful by itself), it could probably be better placed under
jakarta-commons. In that case, even less community requirements would be
needed, even if I would still like to appear as a sponsoring member for
that codebase.

Sorry if this wasn't clear from the start.

Comments?

-- 
Stefano Mazzocchi  One must still have chaos in oneself to be
  able to give birth to a dancing star.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friedrich Nietzsche


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-02 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr.

On 1/2/02 7:47 PM, Stefano Mazzocchi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Please, keep me copied since I'm not currently subscribed to
 general@jakarta
 

Why not ? :)

 Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
 
 I don't see any convincing reason to bring POI to Jakarta, unless I see
 that
 you have a Jakarta PMC member champion your cause. Stefano's
 recommendation
 to you isn't enough, he or someone else needs to be a committer and
 interested in working and overseeing your project.
 
 I do.
 
 I see.  Thank you, for taking the time to consider the prospect and
 provide feedback.
 
 Did you read:
 
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/newproject.html
 
 -jon
 
 Yes I did.  The guidelines lay out how to propose/approve a project,
 they do not seem to preclude proposing that members/commiters look at
 the project, comment and consider a possibly supporting a proposal.
 
 We initially talked about moving this code to xml.apache because I think
 it would give us a great technical advantage, expecially for migrating
 all the existing legacy data encoded in Office formats to the web.
 Having the ability to edit XML content directly from M$ Office is
 something that many of our users would *scream* to be able to do.
 
 At the same time, I suggested Andrew to talk about it here instead of
 xml.apache.org because importing/exporting Office formats back and
 forward from XML is only one of the possible uses of such a technology
 (indexing office formats using Lucene is another darn good example of
 use that currently requires big bucks commercial software!)


So why not to XML.apache?
 
 My apologies if I've gone about that the wrong way.  What would you
 suggest is the more appropriate way to do so?
 
 Interpreting Jon's words with the provided context as I know him, he is
 afraid of you guys lacking the necessary community management skills
 that are required in all Apache projects in order to keep the process
 going and probably didn't see the importance of such a codebase under
 the jakarta mission.
 
 Whether or not this codebase is big/strong/good/sane/future-proof enough
 to be a full jakarta subproject, I don't know, up to you to decide, but
 we have:
 
 1) a working codebase licensed under an ASF-compatible license and
 willing to be donated to the ASF along with copyright and all that.
 2) another Apache community (Cocoon's) *very* excited about integrating
 this technology
 3) two very active developers (the sourceforge logs tell us about it)
 4) a sponsoring ASF member (myself) willing to take care about helping
 bootstrapping the community.
 
 Reading the current guidelines, community-wise, I see no obstacles in
 the creation of such a subproject.
 
 Technically speaking, since POI is more or less a codec library (not
 useful by itself), it could probably be better placed under
 jakarta-commons. In that case, even less community requirements would be
 needed, even if I would still like to appear as a sponsoring member for
 that codebase.
 
 Sorry if this wasn't clear from the start.
 
 Comments?

Why is it appropriate for Jakarta?  That's the missing piece for me.  You
said that the Cocoon community is excited about it, it could be important
for data conversion in XML land...

geir

-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
System and Software Consulting
He who throws mud only loses ground. - Fat Albert


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: [Request For Comment] POI @ apache

2002-01-01 Thread Andrew C. Oliver

Hi,
 
I'm writing, at the recommendation of Stefano Mazzocchi, in hopes of
drawing discussion and perhaps later a vote on the creation of a new
Jakarta subproject based on the POI project (http://poi.sourceforge.net
 http://sourcefoge.net/projects/poi).

The POI project consists of an API for reading and writing Microsoft's
OLE2 Compound Document Format, the format used in Microsoft Office for
Word and Excel documents, as well as ports of file formats based on
it.

Currently the project is composed into the following parts:
 
POIFS - the pure java port of OLE 2 Compound Document format and the
APIs for manipulating it.
 
HSSF - the pure java port of Microsoft's Excel 97 File format (BIFF8)
which is shared by all newer version of Excel as well.
 
HSSFSerializer - Cocoon2 Serializer for HSSF.  It uses the same XML tag
language as Gnumeric. [this will be donated and hosted in Cocoon]
 
HSSFGenerator - commencing. [this will be part of Cocoon as well]
 
HDF - commencing. A pure java port of Microsoft's Word 97 File Format
which is shared by newer versions of Word as well.
 
The POI project has been in development for just over 6 months.  The POI
project has gained a reasonably large user base and currently has four
listed developers and a few occasional contributers.  On any given day
it makes the front page on Sourceforge's most active projects. The POI
project will attract a larger development community once the Word port
begins.  However, the project admins (myself and Marc) will continue to
develop it until pried from our cold dead fingertips regardless of
anything.  We released a beta over the holidays and our 1.0 release
yesterday.

We started the project in order to provide the ability for Cocoon to
present information directly in Office formats and wanted to donate it
to Cocoon directly, but the potential benefits of POI encompass those of
Cocoon or xml.apache.org and we believe that many Jakarta subprojects
could potentially benefit from POI and it makes good business sense
for Apache as a whole.

Possible collaboration scenarios are Lucene indexing large quantities
of data in .doc and .xls files, Slide doing content management in a
corporate environment that necessitates DOC and XLS support, Turbine
doing content delivery in DOC XLS and content editing in DOC, XLS). 

From a personal standpoint, its the most fun thing I've worked on in a
great while.  Microsoft creates great brain teasers!  While I don't
think the project will ever be finished (there will always be a minor
enhancement or detail to be worked out), it is already very useful.

Thoughts?

Happy New Year,

-Andy
-- 
www.sourceforge.net/projects/poi - port of Excel format to java

The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]