Re: [Lintouch-dev] RE: [ANN] C++ Port of Avalon Framework

[Martin Man <Ma...@seznam.cz>]

On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 11:20:20AM -0500, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > I'd like to inform all of you, that the company I work for (www.swac.de)
> > has decided to release one of our key products under opensource license.
> > This product uses our inhouse developed C++ port of Jakarta Avalon
> > Framework
> 
> Why don't you contribute the port to the Apache Avalon project?  There is a
> port for C# also in process.

I'd like to contibure it, but at this moment my C++ port uses at least QT,
log4cpp and cppunit which are (from the license point of view) ASF
incompatibile. Refactoring all of them out cound be a major effort and I'd
like to first know whether there is an interest for it before touching the
code.

> As a side note, I would suggest that any C/C++ port of Avalon ought to also
> be based upon APR, which would vastly improve the portability of the code.

That's a good point and I will investigate it further to see how easy it will
be to use APR wherever possible...

> 	--- Noel

thanx,
martin

Re: [Lintouch-dev] RE: [ANN] C++ Port of Avalon Framework

[Martin Man <Ma...@seznam.cz>]

On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 09:58:31AM +0000, Berin Loritsch wrote:
> Martin Man wrote:
> >
> >I'd like to contribute it, but at this moment my C++ port uses at least QT,
> >log4cpp and cppunit which are (from the license point of view) ASF
> >incompatibile. Refactoring all of them out could be a major effort and I'd
> >like to first know whether there is an interest for it before touching the
> >code.
> 
> :)  The APR  (Apache Portable Runtime) would be a better foundation for
> building a framework like this without tying it to a graphical library
> (QT)--which in itself can be controversial depending on who you talk to.

I agree completely with you, in fact I don't see any problem replacing qt
dependence with apr dependence (except the manpower that I don't have at the
moment)

> My question is how big is your Avalon++ project?  If it is *just* the
> interfaces, then there is no big issue.  Of course the C++ equiv. of an
> interface is a pure virtual abstract class.

The code resembles Avalon Framework (just framework), e.g., it's a set of
interfaces and several Default* implementations.

The code is already avaliable in the public cvs, you can check it and see how
complicated it is.

I've updated, renamed and relicensed the code and put it to the cvs, you can
check it out using 

cvs -d :pserver:anonymous@lintouch.org:/publiccvs login
(press enter when prompted for password)

cvs -d :pserver:anonymous@lintouch.org:/publiccvs co swaloun-framework

(note that ATM you probably wont be able to compile it,
since two small dependent libraries are not yet in the cvs, but they'll be
there hopefully during this night)

as you can see I've renamed the project from ccavalon to swaloun-framework and
placed it under GPL (due to QT dependency, QT is itself GPL) to not conflict
with original avalon license.

I hope I've not violated any rights...

sincerly,
martin

p.s. feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions

Re: [Lintouch-dev] RE: [ANN] C++ Port of Avalon Framework

[Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>]

Martin Man wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 11:20:20AM -0500, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> 
>>>I'd like to inform all of you, that the company I work for (www.swac.de)
>>>has decided to release one of our key products under opensource license.
>>>This product uses our inhouse developed C++ port of Jakarta Avalon
>>>Framework
>>
>>Why don't you contribute the port to the Apache Avalon project?  There is a
>>port for C# also in process.
> 
> 
> I'd like to contibure it, but at this moment my C++ port uses at least QT,
> log4cpp and cppunit which are (from the license point of view) ASF
> incompatibile. Refactoring all of them out cound be a major effort and I'd
> like to first know whether there is an interest for it before touching the
> code.

:)  The APR  (Apache Portable Runtime) would be a better foundation for building
a framework like this without tying it to a graphical library (QT)--which in
itself can be controversial depending on who you talk to.

My question is how big is your Avalon++ project?  If it is *just* the
interfaces, then there is no big issue.  Of course the C++ equiv. of an
interface is a pure virtual abstract class.


> 
> 
>>As a side note, I would suggest that any C/C++ port of Avalon ought to also
>>be based upon APR, which would vastly improve the portability of the code.
> 
> 
> That's a good point and I will investigate it further to see how easy it will
> be to use APR wherever possible...
> 
> 
>>	--- Noel
> 
> 
> thanx,
> martin



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org