[Json-rpc-java] [jabsorb-user] Re: Announcing jabsorb, a new JSON-RPC library!

Michael Clark michael at metaparadigm.com
Tue Sep 25 14:06:53 SGT 2007


   Hi Arthur,
   I think this is all great (except for the fork part) and I'm really
   glad there are people interested in contributing and continuing this
   project - and I have the  full intention to support this (as long as
   it is not too my exclusion). In fact I will be much more interested to
   participate having others actively participating too.
   I would be really happy to be part of a bigger community project with
   shared administrative control and I am completely happy with your
   stated goals. My appreciation to you for standing up to give this
   project some leadership.
   I am comfortable with a package and name change (to jabsorb.org),
   adding full administrative control for you and whoever else you need,
   and adding a (MoinMoin) Wiki and Bugzilla issue database. I can even
   give full shell access to a Linux server for hosting of the website
   and demos with a tomcat instance (on a secure monitored server with
   RAID1 storage and nightly backup). If we can agree on this approach I
   could get this all up and running by 1st Oct.
   As the only real issue I have with all of this is the use of google
   code. Users without gmail accounts (such as me) are unable to
   contribute to the project among many other reasons (both practical and
   idealogical) including the locking-in of all of the project artefacts
   into a proprietary system.
   I personally would prefer to follow a more Apache-like model and also
   to use similar infrastructure to them - they are using MoinMoin wiki
   for all of their projects and they use Bugzilla as their issue tracker
   (as do the majority of other Open Source projects).
   If you are willing to let me provide an open infrastructure and set it
   up in such a way as to grant autonomy to the project then please let
   us know. I would prefer to be working with than with you against me.
   We can discuss the details but I believe we can get us an open
   infrastructure that will suit all of us better (including more open
   access for you too).
   Apologies for not getting back to you earlier on your mail about
   future direction - I haven't completely disappeared - there was in
   fact only *one* email from you that I missed replying to before your
   decision to fork the project. You now have my attention :)
   Best Regards,
   Michael.
   Arthur Blake wrote:

     Hi Michael,
     First off, none of this would have been possible without
     JSON-RPC-Java, and we are very thankful that you created this great
     library!
     Having the main line continue and the fork at the same time is
     obviously counter-productive if instead we can put our resources
     together.  We've been operating under the assumption that the main
     line is not continuing because the discussion on the mailing list
     has trickled down to almost nothing lately, and you had seemed to
     have disappeared.
     I think we should examine the individual needs of JSON-RPC-Java,
     jabsorb and the community, one point at a time to determine if a
     reunification is necessary and desirable.
     Here are my thoughts at the moment on the issue.
     The primary reason for forking is the lack of clarity in project
     direction and lack of ownership and authority in making executive
     decisions-- at least with a fork, we know we are in charge, and can
     freely do what we think is right.
     For example, I know you gave me commit access to JSON-RPC-Java, and
     I appreciated that, and even checked in some changes, but then
     there was no direction on several other suggestions made, and no
     direction on when we could expect the next release.  I for one need
     these changes right away... at least with the fork now there is no
     question of the release time line, because we set it ourselves!
     Google code and Google groups provides us with a very nice
     framework for hosting the library-- and it can have multiple owners
     so that in the future, there is no one single person that will be a
     bottleneck if someone has to leave the project, or can't put very
     much time and energy into it for whatever reason.
     It also has a lot of nice amenities for hosting the project, such
     as bug tracking, a Wiki, SVN, etc. -- this frees us up to not have
     to worry about the details of putting systems in place to handle
     these things and I think we can safely bank on Google somewhat for
     providing decent servers, backups, etc. for our hosting.

     Currently William and myself are the dual owners, and we both have
     executive power to make decisions about the library, so if one of
     us disappears-- at least there is a backup.

     Regarding the name change.  I've seen many people get confused over
     JSON-RPC-Java versus the JSON-RPC protocol.  Given that
     JSON-RPC-Java and jabsorb are evolving into something that may not
     necessarily be completely tied to the JSON-RPC protocol anymore, it
     makes sense to call it something else, both to avoid the confusion
     and to more accurately reflect what it is.  We decided to call it
     jabsorb -- it's not quite an acronym, although it could be thought
     of as one (JAva BrowSer ORB.)  Indeed, JSON-RPC-Java already has
     some of the ORB-like features that are not strictly part of
     JSON-RPC ( e.g. Callable References, [1]et.al), and with Circular
     References and a few other changes -- both the parent library and
     the fork will diverge even more from strict JSON-RPC.

     The name was designed primarily to be short and easy to remember
     and pronounce.

     You may have been referring more to a package name change, to
     remove the com.metaparadigm corporate ownership?  Yes, that is an
     important consideration too-- we wanted it to be something more of
     a community driven entity, rather than from a .com corporate entity
     which appeared to (whether true or not) have the commercial
     interests of metaparadigm at the heart of the library.

     In any case, I think the library needed both a package name change
     and a library name change.
     So, for the time being, we are going to continue with jabsorb
     (especially since we have such a great start and good momentum now)
     but we are certainly open to your suggestions, guidance and a
     possible reunification in some form-- although, this would have to
     meet certain requirements for the direction of the library, the
     hosting situation, naming and control of basic things (which I
     think were laid out pretty well in the project goals in the
     original jabsorb release announcement and this message) to be done
     successfully.
     If you'd like to be a project member of jabsorb and give executive
     guidance and even submit code changes if and when you have the
     time, that would be great!  If it all works out, we could even just
     say that jabsorb is a renaming and change of hosting setup/location
     for JSON-RPC-Java... all that depends on you and your requirements.
     I invite you, the jabsorb team, and anyone else who is interested
     in the direction of the libraries to reply to this thread and
     discuss all of these needs and issues as well as any that I have
     not thought of, and I am optimistic that we can come to some
     conclusion that everyone will be happy with.

   On 9/23/07, Michael Clark <[2]michael at metaparadigm.com> wrote:

     Hi Arthur,
     Arthur Blake wrote:
     > We are pleased to announce *jabsorb
     <[3]http://code.google.com/p/jabsorb >*, a
     > new Java to JavaScript JSON-RPC library!
     >
     > The project goal for *jabsorb* is to maintain (and hopefully
     improve) the
     > practicality and beautiful simplicity that makes
     > JSON-RPC-Java<[4] http://oss.metaparadigm.com/jsonrpc/ >a great
     library,
     > while also adding new common sense features, more test
     > cases, and more documentation to make the library better for
     everyone.
     >
     Yes I have to admit I have been to busy the last year to spend much
     time
     on maintaining JSON-RPC-Java.
     In any case I support this effort of maintaining and enhancing
     JSON-RPC-Java and would in fact like these enhancements to be
     imported
     into the JSON-RPC-Java trunk for its next release.
     If anyone would like to help please let me know and I can arrange
     subversion access.
     If we can avoid a fork I would prefer that. In some respect I would
     support a renaming of the project to reflect it becoming a
     community
     effort. Nonetheless I would like to stay involved in this project
     (or
     more clearly the re-unification of this fork) as the present code
     and
     documentation that forms the basis or jabsorb was 80-90% authored
     by myself.
     Michael.

     --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
     You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
     Groups "jabsorb-user" group.
     To post to this group, send email to
     [5]jabsorb-user at googlegroups.com
     To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
     [6]jabsorb-user-unsubscribe at googlegroups.com
     For more options, visit this group at
     [7]http://groups.google.com/group/jabsorb-user?hl=en
     -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

References

   1. http://et.al/
   2. mailto:michael at metaparadigm.com
   3. http://code.google.com/p/jabsorb
   4. http://oss.metaparadigm.com/jsonrpc/
   5. mailto:jabsorb-user at googlegroups.com
   6. mailto:jabsorb-user-unsubscribe at googlegroups.com
   7. http://groups.google.com/group/jabsorb-user?hl=en


More information about the Json-rpc-java mailing list