Hello To All
I am a soft engineer in China, I have known your foundation and used your projects
for some years, I am eager to take part in the ASF. I had learnt the .NET framework.I
compared it with Java, I find the .NET remoting technology is very powerful, but I can
not find any technology in
On Tuesday, August 10, 2004, at 12:52 PM, Michael Wechner wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I assumed that no votes would be counted as positive silent votes
Nope. There is a notion of "Lazy Consenus", but silence is not a
vote.
Please apologize if I don't fully understand, but how
do you define "
> -Original Message-
> From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I agree on the federation idea, which Berin adopted for the XML TLP, but
> please note that the XML Federation has no impact on TLP issues for the
> Board. The federation idea is about fostering tighter collaboratio
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I assumed that no votes would be counted as positive silent votes
Nope. There is a notion of "Lazy Consenus", but silence is not a vote.
Please apologize if I don't fully understand, but how
do you define "lazy consensus"? Does it make sense if I try
to encourage the
On Aug 10, 2004, at 1:15 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
TLP reporting is a corporate structure issue, whereas
federation is about sharing resources (e.g., web-site and mail domain)
and
community building.
Exactly!
-Brian
-
To uns
Brian McCallister wrote:
> J Aaron Farr wrote:
> > We're seeing a general explosion of new TLP's in Apache or subprojects
> > graduating to TLP level. IMHO at some point we're going to reach a
> > critical mass where it will no longer be very feasible for the Board
> > to directly handle so many TL
Agreed on the federation thing =) The point is to foster the domain
community, while best managing disparate (large) projects. I think what
XML is doing is an excellent way to approach this.
-Brian
On Aug 10, 2004, at 11:03 AM, J Aaron Farr wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Ted Husted [mai
> -Original Message-
> From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 7:13 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Incubation of iBATIS Data Mapper
>
> Since there does seem to be interest in reviewing a proposal from iBATIS,
> I've setup a draft in the Incuba
To answer Clinton's question - I have very little knowledge or interest
in either OJB or Torque. IMO, having any sort of oversight of those
projects would be pointless.
>From what I have seen of them, they both take very different
philisophical approaches to interacting with data than iBATIS.
Pers
Since there does seem to be interest in reviewing a proposal from iBATIS, I've setup a
draft in the Incubator wiki.
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IbatisProposal
Based on the discussion here, I've included a section on whether to apply as TLP or
subproject.
The iBATIS scope is a
This sounds like a great tool! Offline synching for any JDBC compliant
database with triggers and procedures is good stuff.
Are the sources available anywhere right now?
The general steps to enter incubation are described in the document:
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.h
We have decided to make Daffodil Replicator an open source with Apache.
We have a team of 75 professionals who developed Daffodil DB and
Daffodil Replicator. And will continue working with same after making it
open source.
Any suggestion or comment?
Project Description:
Daffodil Replicator is
12 matches
Mail list logo
