Paul,
thank you for frankly describing the facts. Yes it is true, I incorrectly
understood what the Jersey projects' target is when reading about all the
existing contribs.
Now it is clear, and also is the future of my WebDAV code. I will restart it
as a standalone project in the next days. After due consideration of all
pros and cons, it seems I have to abstain from all that really good-looking
vantages that would arise from staying a part of the Jersey project, like
the marketing aspects, the implied downloads and distribution, and the
GlassFish integration. That all is really great and it pains to abstain from
that. But from my innermost belief in what is the best for the WebDAV code
and its potential users, it does not outweigh the negative side effects that
it would have and in part have been mentioned in you posting.
I am really thankful for all the help I received in the past, and as
thankful I will also be in future for your offer to still help us even after
a split and for the permission to use the Jersey mailing list. Actually I am
convinced that the WebDAV code WILL be part of Jersey in some form in
future, but just in a different form, not being a synchronized module but an
independent, bundled third-party JAR or alike; we just have to find the
technical form that will allow this, and maybe in some months you find the
time to workout the details of some glue code together with me. I do not see
that being a separate project circumvents this, since obviously Jersey
already is using other third party binaries already (like JAXB for example).
Also I want to express explicitly that my decision has nothing to do with
any person or comment in this mailing list. You all are very kind and this
decision really is purely basing on the different targets that our projects
do have. I tell this because in the past there was a similar situation in a
different open source project and I want to prevent people from thinking I
cannot work with them or something (After founding and leading a project for
many months I had to yield leadership to another person due to family
commitments; since there had been some disputes before, people thought I did
it for personal dislikes or something).
As soon as I have set up the new location, I'll let you know, certainly.
BTW, you all are invited to join. :-)
Thanks a lot, and have a great time!
Markus
From: Paul.Sandoz_at_Sun.COM [mailto:Paul.Sandoz_at_Sun.COM]
Sent: Freitag, 30. Januar 2009 10:38
To: dev_at_jersey.dev.java.net
Subject: Re: [Jersey] WebDAV pom.xml
Hi Marcus,
Sorry for the late reply and thanks for your understanding.
I got the impression, perhaps incorrectly, that you may have thought the
Jersey project as something different or expected to be something that it is
not.
Jersey is not about the hosting of JAX-RS projects with their own
development, build and release constraints and ultimately their own
identity. Jersey is about the co-ordinated and synchronized development,
building, testing, sustaining and releasing of a high-quality JAX-RS
implementation and useful extensions be they JAX-RS specific or not.
Note that on a practical level we simply do not have the resources to
maintain such a hosting environment even if we wanted to (especially one
that requires testing and sustaining using multiple JAX-RS implementations).
Given that your primary goal is for a cross-platform implementation and
marketing of that then being part of Jersey "brand" may actually hinder your
progress as Jersey is fundamentally bound to a particular JAX-RS
implementation.
I think maybe a good solution is for you to create project where you push
releases to a maven repository, and Jersey can provide a sample using the
WebDAV module (with the version and constraints you have defined) perhaps
with other JAX-RS/Jersey features. If you do that then i do not think the
WebDAV code needs to be "copied/forked" in some sense and consumed into the
Jersey build and release process (i would prefer to avoid such additional
integration work and rely on the build, testing releasing performed by the
WebDAV project).
Of course Craig and I would be very happy if WebDAV is core part of Jersey.
One advantage of that is once WebDAV moves into the trunk and stable
releases it will get sustained. And, may potentially get distributed with
GlassFish (we currently release Jersey to the GlassFish v2/v3 update centers
and Jersey will get distributed as part of Glassfish for EE 6). A possible
disadvantage is might take longer to reach a stable release with Jersey than
as an independent project.
Even if you have a separate project i have no objections to you using the
Jersey users/dev list for discussions on WebDAV design/development/issues.
But, just speaking for myself, i cannot give those discussions a priority
over Jersey-specific discussions.
So as you say there are pros and cons.
Hope that clarifies things a bit: i am trying to be as open as possible
within the constraints of what Jersey is.
Paul.
On Jan 27, 2009, at 6:01 PM, Markus KARG wrote:
Paul,
thanks for your clarification, maybe I misunderstood some of the arguments
(for example, why it shall be any kind of problem that jersey-webdav.jar has
a different version number that jersey-core.jar or that it uses another Java
SE generation).
I have to think about the pros and cons. As I said, being part of the jersey
project is nice, but WebDAV shall keep its status of a product that will run
on any JAX-RS implementation, this is the topmost priority. Maybe we could
do it this way: I develop WebDAV in a separate project with Java SE 6 and
its own versioning schema, which you can bundle with Jersey -- or mirror a
copy of the my latest release (or any of your choice) in the jersey svn tree
which has the exact jersey version number and gets actively checked against
Java SE 5 by you (as you have Java SE 5 while I do not)? So the active
development of WebDAV and Jersey go with different versioning speed, but
both projects can have the latest WebDAV features. Maybe this is the best
solution?
Regards
Markus
From: Craig.McClanahan_at_Sun.COM [mailto:Craig.McClanahan_at_Sun.COM]
Sent: Montag, 26. Januar 2009 22:23
To: dev_at_jersey.dev.java.net
Subject: Re: [Jersey] WebDAV pom.xml
Markus KARG wrote:
Paul,
see inlined. :-)
Markus KARG wrote:
Well, this depends on what Paul and Marc want to make out of Jersey: If they
want to make it a collection of JAX-RS utilities ontop of a JAX-RS
implementation, then I do not see that a split is needed. Actually it was a
standalone project before (internally hosted by us, not publicly available)
and I asked whether I shall make a standalone project or contribute to
Jersey. It was Paul that said that he likes it to be part of Jersey. So I
have to wait for his decision how he will deal with the fact that it can run
with other JAX-RS implementations and has its own version schema and
livecycle.
My personal feelings about this -- if a module lives in a Jersey namespace
(Java package name and/or Maven group and artifact identifiers), ships with
Jersey (presumably a goal at some point in the development process), and has
its source somewhere in the Jersey trunk (presumably would happen with a
merge to trunk from the current branch), then that module should carry the
same version number (and release timelines) as the rest of Jersey. Further,
I would think the package names, as well as other conventions such as JDK
dependencies and common build plugins, should also match.
The fact that the module may or may not have any dependencies on Jersey
internals is an implementation detail (and that of course gets reflected in
the <dependencies> section of its POM) that may or may not change in the
future. That by itself should not be a deciding factor on versioning, or
for that matter naming.
If the module wants the "marketing" benefits :-) of being part of Jersey,
instead of being standalone, then it should really *be* part of Jersey.
Even if (at the moment) it will actually run on any JAX-RS implemenetation
(and therefore declare only the API jar in its dependencies).
This particular codebase is off to a very promising start, and is something
I would personally like to see in Jersey (with, as usual for me, some love
for the client side too :-). But I'd prefer to see it "all in" rather than
being perceived as straddling a fence.
I agree with Craig.
I would like to see this as part of Jersey under the same constraints as
other modules in the contribs. I assumed that this would be the case, but i
did not communicate this assumption before hand, but sometimes these
discussions take time to reveal themselves and solidify :-) as a result i
think we should change the contribution page to detail the constraints for
modules.
It was not clear that "contribution to jersey" means "contributing MODULES
to jersey that give up their indepency" (sorry for assuming that my code
could stay independent -- I am living in a federal nation so I just assumed
this principle. My fault.).
Markus, i think you have to decide whether you want the WebDAV module to be
part of Jersey or as a separate project. Obviously you know which decision i
would prefer but whatever decision you make you have my support in terms of
helping out.
I also want the project to stay part of the Jersey project, but not
necessarily of the Jersey product, but I do not agree with what this means
in the end for users of other JAX-RS implementations. Beeing "a module"
means to give up the idea that other JAX-RS implementations can run my
WebDAV code, or at least, it would be harder to identify what JARs are
needed and what version number contains which changes. I do not want that
WebDAV is "a non-standalone module", but it is and shall stay ONTOP of the
jersey core (why not? what would be the benefit of doing that for the
user?).
So actually for me this reads like "don't be easily useable with other
JAX-RS implementations or we will kick you out", which would be a rather
strange decision for an open project (or maybe this is not an open project
but just a project producing open source? Sorry, my fault.).
I do not see where that follows from what I said. Your pom.xml makes it
clear that you don't depend on any Jersey internals, which means the module
is indeed able to be used with other JAX-RS implementations.
What I proposed is that, if you're going to live in the jersey SVN
repository, you're going to be considered by the rest of the world as "part
of jersey" -- and we should not be surprising people by violating that
expectation.
Why can't we just add a folder to the SVN tree that contains JAX-RS related,
standalone projects which can run with any JAX-RS implementation but are not
forced to have the Java Version and project version be in line with Jersey's
core? That would be an easy, simple solution with which we all could be
live, and I would be happy if WebDAV would not be the only one -- ATOM
support would be absolutely correctly located there, too, and a lot of other
JAX-RS implementation users would be happy to download jersey-atom.jar and
jersey-webdav.jar and use it with any implementation they like. :-)
Frankly, that sounds like you want it to be a separate project. If so,
that's certainly your choice. By the way, the current ATOM support (in both
jersey-atom based on Rome, and jersey-atom-abdera based on Abdera) do have
dependencies on jersey-core -- it saved a bunch of extra coding to do this
-- so they wouldn't really fit your definitlion of a "JAX-RS related" set of
projects that is not implementation dependent.
What do you think about this?
Personally, I really hope you choose to stay part of Jersey -- working with
other implementations too is a nice bonus, but Jersey would definitely
benefit by having WebDAV support as part of its releases.
Regards
Markus
Craig
Paul.
Craig
Regards
Markus
From: Edelson, Justin [mailto:Justin.Edelson_at_mtvstaff.com]
Sent: Samstag, 24. Januar 2009 22:45
To: dev_at_jersey.dev.java.net
Subject: RE: [Jersey] WebDAV pom.xml
Just my 2 cents (and feel free to ignore), but it seems like this needs to
be separated from Jersey and made a standalone project at java.net (or
somewhere else).
Justin
_____
From: Markus KARG [mailto:markus.karg_at_gmx.net]
Sent: Sat 1/24/2009 11:58 AM
To: dev_at_jersey.dev.java.net
Subject: RE: [Jersey] WebDAV pom.xml
Paul,
first of all, thank you for your ideas and sorry for not answering earlier.
Once more I catched a cold and so I did not find the power to spend my
evenings with complex issues. More inline.
> Every time we release Jersey we do the following:
> - make a tag of the trunk;
> - change the version in the trunk of all modules from "xxx-
> SNAPSHOT" to "yyy-SNAPSHOT"; and
> - change the version in the tag of all modules to "xxx" and deploy
> the maven artifacts to the repo.
> It makes it a lot easier to manage releases if all module versions are
> in sync and we release at the same time. Generally all Jersey modules
> tend to have a coupling of Jersey APIs where we also tend to, at least
> currently, have a fast update between components to fix issues and
> support features. So i would prefer to retain this approach.
> Do you envisage having a different release cycle to that of Jersey as
> well as a different version number?
> Maybe the contribs area is not really suitable in this respect and we
> need another area separate from Jersey for components that can be
> versioned and released independently? e.g.
> trunk/components
> I think that may better suit your requirements based on what you say
> above and below. i.e. i don't want to unduly constrain your
> development and what you depend on. We can set up separate Hudson jobs
> to build components.
In fact, WebDAV stuff is not related to Jersey in any way. The project was
build solely on JAX-RS 1.0, and does not know about any Jersey specific
thing. So from a technical aspect, it is not a Jersey component in the
narrow sense, but more a usage of Jersey, just as it could be a usage of any
other JAX-RS 1.0 implementation. This is the reason why the release politics
makes sense to stay different from Jersey's. WebDAV just has no technical
need to keep anything in sync with Jersey. The problem is that it seems
there is no really good place to put it. Actually WebDAV is neither a
contrib to the Jersey engine while it IS one to the Jersey project as a pool
of RESTful technology projects, and it neither is a component of the Jersey
engine. I wouldn't say that it would be best to put it into its own top
level project, but maybe it would be good to have a new folder containing
projects like mine which just USES JAX-RS but not directly Jersey, and which
could be downloaded separately? I'd like people of other JAX-RS
implementations being able to use WebDAV, and that would be the best way for
that. So Jersey could be two things: A JAX-RS implementation with additional
features PLUS a set of JAX-RS components independent of the JAX-RS
implementation. This would also be a good place to put Daniel Manzke's
"Microsoft Interoperability" stuff. What do you think about that?
> Note that JAX-RS does require support on SE 5, so the additional
> Jersey modules require it as well. In IDEs (at least in NetBeans) you
> can set a project to use SE 6 but compile SE 5 constrained source to
> catch errors.
Actually what your wrote into the spec is that SE 5 OR LATER is needed, so
it is not a constraint to exactly match SE 5 in all projects that are USING
JAX-RS -- and my code just USES Jersey. My WebDAV code targets in Java EE 6
contained JAX-RS, so SE 6 is what I develop and test upon (and what I can
afford -- I have no time to explicitly test drive on SE 5). Again, WebDAV is
nothing that is inside of Jersey, and it sits ontop of it, so if somebody
wants to use WebDAV he must use SE 6 (which is not a problem in times of SE
6 everywhere and EE 6 published soon). I do not see the actual problem right
now. Can you elaborate on this so I could understand (anyways I have no time
to check SE 5, and my Eclipse will not know what APIs are not existing in SE
5 unless I install SE 5 in addition to SE 6, which I just will not due since
I do not understand the need)?
> Jakub will know more, he is our Maven guru :-)
Did not hear anything from him so far, so it seems it was OK what I did.
> > As "1.0" effectively means
> > "[1.0,)" I
> > do not see why it is better than my explicit "[1.0,)"...?!
> Oh! i guess i do not understand maven version declarations :-) i want
> to be clear under what conditions Jersey has been tested against but
> did not want to necessarily restrict developers to using other
> versions.
Then you should change from your "1.0" (i. e. "1.0, or later than 1.0") to
my "[1.0;2.0)" (i. e. "anything in the range from 1.0 to but not including
2.0"), which more clearly says that API changes (2.x, 3.x) are not accepted,
while bug fixes are.
Have Fun
Markus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_jersey.dev.java.net
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_jersey.dev.java.net