incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <>
Subject Re: moving JAM to org.apache.jam
Date Fri, 21 May 2004 15:59:30 GMT

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.

BTW where is the current documentation for JAM?  The links on don't seem to be valid anymore.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick Calahan []
> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 15:27
> To:
> 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:
> Thanks,
> -p

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message