RE: [Proposal] NoNameYet aka Davos

ant elder wrote: > I think there was consensus with the Tuscany folks to join the new project > if it went ahead That's what I was seeing. Coincidentally, I was just reading the mail archives when your message came in. > but after assessing all the discussions and feedback from the Incubator >

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet aka Davos

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 7:54 PM, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ant elder wrote: > > > Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > > > There is a discussion going on Tuscany dev list whether the SDO part > of > > > > the community would like to join the new project in the event it > will > > > > get

RE: [Proposal] NoNameYet aka Davos

ant elder wrote: > Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > > There is a discussion going on Tuscany dev list whether the SDO part of > > > the community would like to join the new project in the event it will > > > get approved in incubation. Once there is a consensus, Kelvin will > > > update the proposal. >

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet aka Davos

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 5:10 PM, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There is a discussion going on Tuscany dev list whether the SDO part of > > the community would like to join the new project in the event it will > > get approved in incubation. Once there is a consensus, Kelvin will

RE: [Proposal] NoNameYet aka Davos

> There is a discussion going on Tuscany dev list whether the SDO part of > the community would like to join the new project in the event it will > get approved in incubation. Once there is a consensus, Kelvin will > update the proposal. > Also, we think we found a name for the project: Davos. It

RE: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

rom: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of kelvin goodson > Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 7:57 AM > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link > > On 19/02/2008, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

FYI, to date the discussion I opened on jcp-open to try to understand people's experiences re developing reference impls in an environment that fosters innovation is sadly inconclusive. There are 2 respondents to date, one with a strong opinion that there is no conflict, and one proposing that t

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

On 19/02/2008, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > One topic from the tuscany-user discussion that's worth exposing here > is whether the NNY project would be a "pure RI" with no extensions > beyond the spec, or a vehicle for innovation to extend the specs, as > both Tuscany SCA and SDO hav

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

; From: Paul Fremantle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 11:50 AM > > To: general@incubator.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link > > > > > Cezar > > > > I do

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

list > > (http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg02505.html ) > > the new infrastructure would seem a better fit. > > > > Cezar > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Paul Fremantle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTE

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

(http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg02505.html ) > the new infrastructure would seem a better fit. > > Cezar > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Paul Fremantle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 11:50 AM >

RE: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

(http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg02505.html ) the new infrastructure would seem a better fit. Cezar > -Original Message- > From: Paul Fremantle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 11:50 AM > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Su

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

of days ago, until now there were only a few but encouraging > responses. > > Cezar Andrei > > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: kelvin goodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 31 Jan 2008 09:47 > Subject: Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : L

RE: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

rwarded message -- From: kelvin goodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 31 Jan 2008 09:47 Subject: Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link To: general@incubator.apache.org http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NoNameYetProposal That's what you get for employing reuse tact

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > Perhaps we should force all initial committers to divulge if they > are strictly involved in the effort as a work assignment, or if they > have a broader interest in the new podling? +1 > That said, we never "judge" people per-say [...] I know. Just couldn't resi

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Roland Weber wrote: I think that is a bit oversimplified. IBM has strict rules about open source participation. It is either "on private time", such as my involvement at Apache. Then the person is acting as an individual. Or it is "on company time". Then the person is

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

On Feb 4, 2008 4:54 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Roland Weber wrote: > > I think that is a bit oversimplified. IBM has strict rules about > > open source participation. It is either "on private time", such > > as my involvement at Apache. Then the person is acting as an > >

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

Roland Weber wrote: I think that is a bit oversimplified. IBM has strict rules about open source participation. It is either "on private time", such as my involvement at Apache. Then the person is acting as an individual. Or it is "on company time". Then the person is doing what he or she is paid

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

On Feb 4, 2008 7:24 AM, Stefan Hepper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't group all IBM'ers, really - I actually believe IBM'ers do tons > > of good in many open source projects. Also I think IBM itself is a > > somewhat good open source citizen in several regards. > > > > But it is not individu

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

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 J

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

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 pat

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

I don't group all IBM'ers, really - I actually believe IBM'ers do tons of good in many open source projects. Also I think IBM itself is a somewhat good open source citizen in several regards. But it is not individuals that propose this particular project, as I understand it: it is IBM and BEA.

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

Jeremy Boynes wrote: On Feb 3, 2008, at 5:31 PM, Paul Fremantle wrote: Meeraj, Jeremy Please read my note again. At no point did I say or imply that BEA led anything. The only thing I said about BEA was: "the two companies who couldn't agree to do it together in Tuscany". Is there anything in

RE: [Proposal] NoNameYet

kelvin goodson wrote: > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NoNameYetProposal As Paul and Mattieu asked, since SDO is quite closely aligned with SCA, is there any point or interest in working with, or joining, Tuscany? --- Noel

RE: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

> But it is not individuals that propose this particular project, as I > understand it: it is IBM and BEA. And it was IBM that, in my view, > dumped the JSR 168 RI and then fled - not any individuals as such. And IBM is also a significant force behind Tuscany, and have definitely not fled. The

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

On Feb 3, 2008, at 5:31 PM, Paul Fremantle wrote: Meeraj, Jeremy Please read my note again. At no point did I say or imply that BEA led anything. The only thing I said about BEA was: "the two companies who couldn't agree to do it together in Tuscany". Is there anything incorrect about that sta

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

Meeraj, Jeremy Please read my note again. At no point did I say or imply that BEA led anything. The only thing I said about BEA was: "the two companies who couldn't agree to do it together in Tuscany". Is there anything incorrect about that statement? I'm willing to be corrected if I'm wrong. Pa

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

Bill Stoddard wrote: > Disclosure... I work for IBM. So do I. > IBM'ers participate on projects as individuals and it's the actions of > individuals that should be judged. I think that is a bit oversimplified. IBM has strict rules about open source participation. It is either "on private time",

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

On Feb 3, 2008, at 2:05 PM, Meeraj Kunnumpurath wrote: Paul, The fork on Tuscany was not instigated by BEA. Of the three committers who decided to leave Tuscany, due to technical differences and otherwise, only Jim Marino was employed by BEA. Myself and Jeremy Boynes were independent committers

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

Paul, The fork on Tuscany was not instigated by BEA. Of the three committers who decided to leave Tuscany, due to technical differences and otherwise, only Jim Marino was employed by BEA. Myself and Jeremy Boynes were independent committers, though, Jeremy was employed by IBM and leading the devel

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

Leo I am a mentor with Tuscany. I'm not concerned about where Tuscany is now... I think its growing well and is progressing towards graduation. However, Tuscany did have a significant fork a while back and this new proposal has completely confused me: basically its a proposal for part of what's al

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

Bill Stoddard wrote: Endre Stølsvik wrote: Leo Simons wrote: Sure, activity is not that high, and there's not a *huge* developer community, but there does not really seem to be any problem, either. Apache doesn't require projects to be huge successes (by whatever metric) as long as they're h

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

Endre Stølsvik wrote: Leo Simons wrote: Sure, activity is not that high, and there's not a *huge* developer community, but there does not really seem to be any problem, either. Apache doesn't require projects to be huge successes (by whatever metric) as long as they're healthy and self-sustai

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

kelvin goodson wrote: I think what we were trying to say is that this work belongs in a project of it own ... The new project requires an environment where it can focus on the clear aim of implementing this JSR RI and TCK, or future versions, Is this really what Apache is for? without the di

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

On Feb 2, 2008 6:47 AM, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 31, 2008, at 3:02 PM, Paul Fremantle wrote: > > Maybe no-one has responded yet because no-one wants to ask the hard > > questions! > > Nah, it's mostly because the mail threading on this thingie was > broken a few times. It mak

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

Hi, On Feb 2, 2008 10:24 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Feb 1, 2008 12:59 PM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ...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 > >

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

Hi Paul, what was it about the proposal section discussing Tuscany that confused you? I think what we were trying to say is that this work belongs in a project of it own, since Tuscany has a so much wider scope than this, and the overall aims of the proposal are quite different. The new projec

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

On Feb 1, 2008 12:59 PM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ...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?... IMHO, Jackrabbit is a successful example of such an

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

Leo Simons wrote: Sure, activity is not that high, and there's not a *huge* developer community, but there does not really seem to be any problem, either. Apache doesn't require projects to be huge successes (by whatever metric) as long as they're healthy and self-sustaining. This was not h

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

On Feb 2, 2008 6:08 AM, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > However, much more importantly, proposals should be evaluated on > their own merits, not based on what happened to some other unrelated > project 4 years ago. > +1 -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany Committer http://people.apache.or

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

On Jan 31, 2008, at 3:02 PM, Paul Fremantle wrote: Maybe no-one has responded yet because no-one wants to ask the hard questions! Nah, it's mostly because the mail threading on this thingie was broken a few times. It makes things hard to follow. Simon -- please use that "reply-to" button in

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

On Feb 1, 2008, at 2:19 PM, Endre Stølsvik wrote: this isn't exactly some court Exactly. Now, if I look through http://apache.markmail.org/search/?q=pluto#query:pluto+page:1 +state:facets pluto does not seem a problematic "code dump" project, and it also definitely isn't a "single deve

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

On Feb 1, 2008 1:15 PM, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 12:37 -0800, Matthieu Riou wrote: > > On Feb 1, 2008 10:04 AM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Paul Fremantle wrote: > > > > > > > Kelvin, NoNameProposers > > > > > > > > Maybe no-one has r

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 12:37 -0800, Matthieu Riou wrote: > On Feb 1, 2008 10:04 AM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Paul Fremantle wrote: > > > > > Kelvin, NoNameProposers > > > > > > Maybe no-one has responded yet because no-one wants to ask the hard > > > questions! So here I go:

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

On Feb 1, 2008 10:04 AM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Paul Fremantle wrote: > > > Kelvin, NoNameProposers > > > > Maybe no-one has responded yet because no-one wants to ask the hard > > questions! So here I go: > > > > Perhaps you can explain why this effort isn't being rolled into th

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

Paul Fremantle wrote: Kelvin, NoNameProposers Maybe no-one has responded yet because no-one wants to ask the hard questions! So here I go: Perhaps you can explain why this effort isn't being rolled into the Tuscany work. There are some obvious reasons why I am confused by this proposal: 1.

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

Stefan Hepper wrote: It is not true that after the JSR was final everything stopped. In fact once we had finished 1.0 there was still work done to get to a more stable 1.0.1 release. After that the pluto community re-structed the code which led to the pluto 1.1 stream, so you can see that it w

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

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 On Feb 1, 2008 11:11 AM, Stefan Hepper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > here my

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet - Pluto

here my response to Endre's mail (http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200801.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]): about Pluto V 1.x: Due to the JCP process guidelines at that time you could not have early public drafts and thus you are correct that the RI got to Apache very late. Ho

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet

kelvin goodson wrote: Hi all, We've posted an Apache Incubator proposal onto the incubator wiki http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NoNameYetProposal We haven't got a good name yet, SandStorm is a contender, as is Snowdon Suggestions and comments welcome, Kelvin.

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

Kelvin, NoNameProposers Maybe no-one has responded yet because no-one wants to ask the hard questions! So here I go: Perhaps you can explain why this effort isn't being rolled into the Tuscany work. There are some obvious reasons why I am confused by this proposal: 1. Tuscany already has the ob

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet : Link Error - please use this link

http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NoNameYetProposal That's what you get for employing reuse tactics -- gmail remembers the original URL. I've been caught by this before, so I thought I had taken appropriate action to avoid this behaviour, but sadly not so, apologies. Kelvin On 31/01/2008, kelvin

[Proposal] NoNameYet

Hi all, We've posted an Apache Incubator proposal onto the incubator wiki http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NoNameYetProposal We haven't got a good name yet, SandStorm is a contender, as is Snowdon Suggestions and comments welcome, Kelvin.