You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to j-dev@xerces.apache.org by Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@covalent.net> on 2000/10/21 10:13:28 UTC
-CORRECTED VERSION - Report on a Workshop on Xerces-j hosted by the
ASF/XML project
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Report on a Workshop on Xerces-j hosted by the ASF/XML project
on the 16th of October
Version 1.01
* Corrected version - unfortunately due to travel
and crossing email I missed some of the comments
made on a draft circulated among the workshop
participants. This final report should take all
comments into acount.
Subject:
Xerces-j Projects
Invited:
xerces-j-dev@xml.apache.org
general@xml.apache.org
members@apache.org
pmc@xml.apache.org
Host:
The ASF/XML project
Location:
Meeting room provided by Covalent Technologies
706 Mission street 2nd Floor
Present:
Chuck Murco
Jason Hunter
James Duncan Davidson
Jim Driscoll
Edwin Goei
Arnaud Le Hors
Andy Clark
Ted Leung (by phone)
Sam Ruby (by phone)
Dirk-Willem van Gulik
It was recognized that all present where effectively representing both
their respective employers as well as representing a sizable chunk of the
active members of the ASF's xml-xerces-j project. There is some inherent
conflict in this - an issue which is common across all ASF projects.
The xml-xerces-j project is currently seen shifting their focus towards a
'future' parser. This has caused a number of factual engineering, as
well as perceived, differces of opinions. Some of which caused
consternation within the member's their respective employers.
It is important to take away those concerns. Part of this is broadening
the developer base. Although a more welcoming attidude towards new
developers might help it is also fair to say that the current xerces-1
code base is complex to understand and that the current -dev mailing list
carries a lot of -user traffic.
As in any engineering project - it is recognized that the design for the
new parser will have to make tradeoffs. The current charters of the ASF
and the XML project offer some guidance. The following three properties
are considered inportant, and in this particular order:
Specification Compliance
and feedback to the working group(s) setting
those specifications.
Modular, Readablility
Performance, Footprint
It is also noted that a moduler design with a good interface design
would allow people to change those tradeoffs, for example by
swapping in compatible parsers.
One discussion which needs to happen in due time is a charter discussion;
do we need to embed some of those requirements into our charter, and how.
And do we want to juggle some of the tradeoffs. Another item which needs
attention is dead code and other cruft in the current tree. It should be
clear from now on that any (larger) code contributions is only to be
accepted if there is a clear maintenance path. Traditionally, within the
http project, a '+1' vote on such a contribution should also lead to some
joint responsibility later - when the original contributor is perhaps no
longer active - and that code needs maintenance. We also should work out
how we deal which such dead code. In general there are a lot of similar
code management issues, which could be used to elaborate on and refine
the charter.
Next the group discussed xerces-1, the xerces-2 branch, the requirements
documents and crimson. Measured against the above goals it was generally
agreed on that xerces-1 has no clear future, that crimson could not be a
that future either; and that we should start focusing on xerces-2 now. A
lot of groundwork has been done, requirement documents are actively worked
upon, there exists comparisons and 'lessons learned' documents of xerces-1
and crimsion and even a branch in the xerces-1 tree.
It is now just a matter of making all that visible in one place and start
getting some traction.
Right now we have a flat commit model across all xerces projects - any xerces
commiter can commit to any xerces project and the web site. This is felt as
something we should stress and capitalize upon. And something which will
actively help us transition and re-focus develeopers towards on
xerces-2. But at the same time we should update the web site to guide
people towards xerces-2 for new work and make the history behind crimson
and xerces-1 clear. Though we should not be putting any hurdles in the
way of people who want to maintain either of the old projects - the
meeting really wants xerces-2 the place to be.
Secondly xml-contrib should be as liberal a staging ground and stepping
stone as possible. Where things like treedif can live and worked upon for
example. It is suggested that we document xml-contrib and make it as
welcome and as easy to get 'into' as the original 'incoming' of the apache
httpd project.
Suggested actions
1 Move the current xerces-j-dev@xml.apache.org group
into xerces-j-users. And create two new groups,
xerces-j-dev and xerces2-jdev.
The reason for this is twofold - the current -dev list
has a large volume of user traffic; and we want to
clearly focus the -2 traffic.
-> This would need to be voted upon. When agreed to be
done by duncan/dirkx.
2. Move crimson out of xml-contrib and give it
a historic status and a repository of its own
- which is documented and pointed to from the
website. And clearly labeled this as a 'dead'
code line - and urge any one who wants to work
on xml parsers to make contributions to the Xerces 2
Any discussion should be carried out on general.
-> needs to be voted upon.
7. Move the xerces-2 branch in xerces-1 to a repository
of its own; xml-xerces2. And label xerces-1 as
an effective dead end - which is there to be maintained
but not further developed. Instead people are
urged to work on Xerces 2
-> needs to be voted upon.
3. Create and posting a FAQ on the (new) xercjes-j-users
mailing list.
-> needs to be voted upon.
4. Rearranging the web site to make the historic/maintenance
only status of xerces-j/crimson clear, make xerces-2
clearly the track for the future, and aggregate the
current requirements docs, comparison and other docs
all in one place. Where needed this will simply be
mapped directly into the (source) tree's - and thus
bypass the current xml->html engine.
-> needs to be voted upon.
5. Prepare document on how to insert xerces 1&2 into the new JDKs
-> to be prepared and submitted.
6. Document the fact that we want general@ and xml-contrib
as open as possible - for anyone to park a cool idea.
Timeline
It is suggested that the above items are brought to vote on the
mailing list as soon as possible; and if possible so that some
of this can be announced or discussed during the apache con. Dirk
will request a soap-box moment during one of the (ASF) plenaries
which would allow someone from the xerces-j community to stand up
and talk for 5mins about where we are.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.1i
iQA/AwUBOfFQI/1viMYh0KcbEQIlpwCgwZfjJuxk7daYG5qoPEugjbOECxkAn3NK
SlWVA3wYfQx6x8iqDIbgf5qn
=rOvj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----