Stefan Thanks for the clearly thought out answer.
Paul On Feb 4, 2008 5:55 AM, Stefan Hepper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Paul, > I still think it is of value doing RIs at Apache, because it makes the > standard that is implemented more open and easier to consume. > > I also think that the new JCP process allows to do it more inline with > Apache rules, however it still requires some special treatment (and some > additional patience) as many of the decisions are done via the JSR EG > and not on the Apache mailing list. > > Another major issue is that from the JCP point of view the spec lead is > responsible for providing the RI when submitting the final spec and thus > needs to ensure that the RI gets finished in time. Therefore the > situation that Endre criticizes, that committers from one company are > very active in one phase of the project and then "disappear", arise if > the community is not focused on the new release (e.g. in case of Pluto > 2.0), but trying to stabilize and finalize the current version (Pluto > 1.1). On the other hand that is also a decision of the community, the > more active they are on the new versions, the less code the spec-lead > company needs to contribute. > > > Stefan > > > Stefan > > > > Thank you for you insights and response. > > > > Maybe the interesting question is whether you think - based on your > > experience - if is is really appropriate to try to create a JCP RI as > > an Apache incubator project? > > > > Paul > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Paul Fremantle Co-Founder and VP of Technical Sales, WSO2 OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
