At 10:59 AM 5/21/2004 -0500, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Patrick,
I have heard a lot of good things about JAM, but have not looked at it yet. In Geronimo we would like to offer support for annotations in the GBean service layer, but that would mean using a 1.5 VM. I don't see us raising the minimum required VM to 1.5 until J2EE 1.5 comes out (2007-2008?). I only see this desire to use an annotation like system expanding as more users adopt java 1.5, so if JAM can provide an upgrade path I for one would be very interested.
Right, I have exactly the same problem in xml-beans, so that is what JAM is designed to solve.
BTW where is the current documentation for JAM? The links on http://www.pcal.net/jam don't seem to be valid anymore.
Hi Dain. My apologies, I'm a bit still trying to get my online house in order. I just refreshed the docs - you can see them at
http://www.pcal.net/jam/docs/index.html
I should have the binaries and sources available for download very soon as well.
Thanks, -p
-dain
-----Original Message----- From: Patrick Calahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 15:27 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Fwd: moving JAM to org.apache.jam
Hello. I'm a committer on the xml-beans project. As part of my work there, I've written an API called 'JAM' (Java API for Metadata) that is becoming a useful technology in its own right. JAM is distinct from xml-beans - it is used by xbean's java-to-schema compilers, but JAM does not use xbeans at all.
I built JAM to solve a particular set of problems that I have relating to metadata and JSR175, and I believe that many other java developers are going to need a solution to those same problems very soon. I already have some consumers of the API who don't care about xbeans - they only want the services that JAM provides.
Accordingly, I am trying to give it some more visibility. One thing I would like to do is give it a better package name; it currently is
org.apache.xmlbean.impl.jam
Ideally, I would like it to be
org.apache.jam
but I'm not sure what Apache's policies are on using top-level package names - I figured I'd better talk to someone about it first. I bounced the idea off of the xmlbeans-dev list last week, and everyone there seems ok with it (email appended).
Ultimately, I really think JAM should be a separate project. I'd love for it to be an Apache project if possible, though I'm not sure what I should do to start that process.
If you want to read more about JAM, I've temporarily posted the docs and some white papers here:
http://www.pcal.net/jam
Thanks, -p
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
