On 12/21/05, Ted Leung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd love to have a good AJAX project here at Apache, but I'm not at
> all convinced that this is the best way to get it. I also talked to
> Alex Russell at Dojo about coming to the ASF (at this year's OSCON),
> and the overhead thing was already
put me down as a volunteer as well.
Original Message
Subject: Re: AJAX Toolkit Framework Proposal
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:08:04 -0500
From: Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Organization: Holsman.NET
Newsgroups: server.apache.inc
Craig McClanahan wrote:
The Zimbra part of the proposal could, I suppose, be held to aim at that
goal. If you believe proposing an Eclipse-only tooling story (apparently to
the exlusion of at least some folks in the Eclipse Foundation :-) forwards
this goal, I would suggest taking this part of
On 12/21/05, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Craig McClanahan wrote:
> >
> >>From a software engineering viewpoint, focusing on a single tool
>
> Have you any other tools in mind? Bring them on!
Actually, I don't -- tooling-specific adaptations of generic technologies
seem best fitted to
Craig,
Sam addressed the social engineering viewpoint; I'd like to talk about the
software side:
> Craig McClanahan wrote:
>From a software engineering viewpoint, focusing on a single tool as a
>delivery vehicle will tend to bias architectural and implementation
>decisions towards what is easy to
Jesse Kuhnert wrote:
I chose tapestry as a web framework to use, and now contribute to, because I
thought I was making the best choice as far as design and overall
flexibility.(not to the detriment of other projects, just a personal
choice..) It's a shame that all of the other considerations ha
Though I'm still very new to ASF (recently added to tapestry) and the goings
on of how everything works I thought I would voice my tiny little opinion
into the fray as well.
It seems that, at least from what I can tell, choosing a javascript library
is a very personal sort of thing for most people
Craig McClanahan wrote:
From a software engineering viewpoint, focusing on a single tool
Have you any other tools in mind? Bring them on!
Once again, let me state that the goal is to seed a non-exclusive AJAX
community at the ASF.
In case it isn't perfectly clear: including Zimbra isn't
On 12/20/05, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> > Adam Peller wrote:
> [snip]
> > So the questions are:
> > - is the ASF the place for Eclipse extensions? I don't deny the ability
> > to _existing_ project to host their tooling, but this isn't the case
> here.
>
> As I
On 12/21/05, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The ASF isn't very good at "saying no", at least not very loudly. All our
> processes are geared at "saying yes" the right way and only if we feel
> comfortable. It seems we have something to learn here, and its a bit scary
> since this may ha
On 12/21/05, Ted Leung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Dec 20, 2005, at 12:19 PM, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>
> > Sam Ruby wrote:
> >> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> >>
> >> As a general rule, the ASF doesn't go out "inviting", people
> >> within the ASF either start a new project, or projects come to us.
>
Sam Ruby wrote:
> Raphaël Luta wrote:
>
>
> Overall, there is clearly strong interest in AJAX at the ASF, whether it
> be based on Zimbra or Dojo or whatever. Furthermore, the proposal needs
> to be revised, particularly to incorporate the people who have expressed
> an interest in participating
On 12/21/05, Ted Leung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd love to have a good AJAX project here at Apache, but I'm not at
> all convinced that this is the best way to get it. I also talked to
> Alex Russell at Dojo about coming to the ASF (at this year's OSCON),
> and the overhead thing was alread
> Big assumption right there. I'll assert there's a reasonable
> chance I understand what's under the hood of the Eclipse
> platform quite well. IIRC I helped the Equinox people decide
> on what to put in there at some point...
Mea culpa. I was reacting to the comment about the "heavyweight
Raphaël Luta wrote:
Excellent post! It is nice to see somebody take the time to review the
actual proposal.
Overall, there is clearly strong interest in AJAX at the ASF, whether it
be based on Zimbra or Dojo or whatever. Furthermore, the proposal needs
to be revised, particularly to incorp
Javier H
Pedemonte/Austin/[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Donald
Sedota/Austin/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject
Le 21 déc. 05, à 12:01, Leo Simons a écrit :
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 04:49:29PM -0800, Martin Cooper wrote:
Some comments:
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 10:54:03AM +0100, Raphaël Luta wrote:
To me it raises all the possible incubation warning bells:
Same feelings here, I agree with Martin's a
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 03:01 -0800, Leo Simons wrote:
>
> I have this urge to set up an "Under construction" sign on the incubator front
> page with a subtitle along the lines of "closed for renovations"...
+1, to give us a bit of soul searching time. We should put a cap on the
renovation time - 2
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 04:49:29PM -0800, Martin Cooper wrote:
> Some comments:
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 10:54:03AM +0100, Rapha?l Luta wrote:
> To me it raises all the possible incubation warning bells:
Two convincing posts.
> In summary I see this proposal as a high risk, low value offer to t
Leo Simons wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 04:14:22PM +0100, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
I'm quite puzzled by this proposal. As I understand it, its mainly about
a set of Eclipse plugins for Ajax applications and the Zimbra library
that, among other features, provides a set of SWT-like widgets.
On Dec 20, 2005, at 12:19 PM, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
As a general rule, the ASF doesn't go out "inviting", people
within the ASF either start a new project, or projects come to us.
You're playing with words. Sure, there's no formal invitation
process
Martin Cooper wrote:
Some comments:
+1 to all your points.
Personally, I am less than happy at seeing yet another large project
proposed from a corporate source (and IBM at that), along with a dozen new
committers who have not earned their merit at the ASF as most committers
have. I feel
On Dec 21, 2005, at 12:56 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 22:10 -0800, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
However, after having been on the other side of this discussion during
the Synapse startup with the hullabaloo caused by ObjectWeb folks, I
have no patience for any kind of "this sp
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 04:49:29PM -0800, Martin Cooper wrote:
> Some comments:
>
> 1) This appears to be two proposals rolled into one. One is to incubate a
Yup. And Adam responded with the dreaded "subproject" word.
We determined a good while back that "umbrella" projects are bad. So
*starting
Martin Cooper wrote:
>
> Personally, I am less than happy at seeing yet another large project
> proposed from a corporate source (and IBM at that), along with a dozen new
> committers who have not earned their merit at the ASF as most committers
> have. I feel the ASF is losing its way, and becomi
Mike, dude...
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 10:32:25PM -0500, Mike Milinkovich wrote:
> > Hmm. I think your email is more puzzling to me than the
> > original proposal :-) (A heavyweight java-based IDE for doing
> > what's essentially designed as "lightweight" stuff...
>
> It seems that your understa
On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 22:10 -0800, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
>
> My second reason for asking was as a polite gesture towards the
> Eclipse Foundation, being another respectable, non-profit, open source
> organization.
I have ABSOLUTELY nothing against the Eclipse Foundation or their
products; I'm mys
On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 23:18 -0500, Adam Peller wrote:
>
> 2) The other subproject is Zimbra itself, but there may be other runtimes
> here as well. As you say, the main goal here is to provide layers of
> abstraction to hide the traditional browser tricks and quirk modes to make
> browser-based p
On 12/20/05, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike,
>
> Some one comes to ASF with a proposal, typically we give it our full
> consideration. I can understand why cliff asked about eclipse option
> (Beehive/Eclipse stuff!),
Actually, I had two purposes behind my question. One was to
cubator.apache.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] cc
om
Subject
Re: AJAX T
Got it! thanks
-- dims
On 12/20/05, Mike Milinkovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Please pardon me for being blunt, I don't really care about
> > what happens inside IBM/Eclipse or who said what/when.
>
> Dims,
>
> Trust me, no one hates that bullshit more than I. I was just reacting to
>
On Dec 20, 2005, at 10:32 PM, Mike Milinkovich wrote:
It's rather like saying what the heck is the Apache web server
doing with a
JVM project?
I say that about once a week these days ;)
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Mike Milinkovich wrote:
> > > So your assertion is that all open source code should be done at
> > > Apache and there are no reasonable scenarios in which another open
> > > source community can or should attempt to co-operate with Apache?
> > I don't believe that Sam said anything of the sort.
Cliff,
Sam has gone through the rationale on community, licensing, etc. On a
technical level, I'd like to point out that while the tools subproject does use
Eclipse and the WebTools project, it attempts to do so through limited,
well-known APIs. We've been working with the Eclipse team on def
> Please pardon me for being blunt, I don't really care about
> what happens inside IBM/Eclipse or who said what/when.
Dims,
Trust me, no one hates that bullshit more than I. I was just reacting to
Sam's assertion that Eclipse was fully informed and happy with outcome and
wanted to be precis
ing this to the Eclipse
> Foundation?
> >>
> >>Since this project appears to have far stronger dependencies on
> >>Eclipse Foundation projects rather than anything from Apache, can you
> >>tell me why you think bringing this project here is likely to help you
&g
> > So your assertion is that all open source code should be done at
> > Apache and there are no reasonable scenarios in which another open
> > source community can or should attempt to co-operate with Apache?
>
> I don't believe that Sam said anything of the sort.
Really? I am truly not meanin
Hey Sanjiva! Yeah, it's been a while. I've been trying to follow your
projects and blogs over the years. Sounds like all is going well.
No secret agendas here :) Happy to answer.
>So this may not be an appropriate part of the discussion for deciding
>whether to accept this for incubation or n
Mike,
Some one comes to ASF with a proposal, typically we give it our full
consideration. I can understand why cliff asked about eclipse option
(Beehive/Eclipse stuff!), but i can understand Adam/Sam's view
completely as I am on the "ASL 2.0 is good" band-wagon and i do want
ASF's stamp on everyth
Mike Milinkovich wrote:
> So your assertion is that all open source code should be
> done at Apache and there are no reasonable scenarios in
> which another open source community can or should attempt
> to co-operate with Apache?
I don't believe that Sam said anything of the sort.
> Solomon has
> In particular, why would taking Solomon's advice and dividing
> the child in half be benefitial (sic) to anybody?
Interesting question. So your assertion is that all open source code should
be done at Apache and there are no reasonable scenarios in which another
open source community can or sh
> Hmm. I think your email is more puzzling to me than the
> original proposal :-) (A heavyweight java-based IDE for doing
> what's essentially designed as "lightweight" stuff...
Leo,
It seems that your understanding of the Eclipse platform needs some
updating. The Java IDE is definitely what
Mike Milinkovich wrote:
[snip]
(I appreciate that you were not directly engaged with Eclipse prior to this
proposal being made public.)
[snip]
The last talk we had with IBM concerning this project was on October 20th
First, thank you very much for posting posting here. I'm confident that
> -Original Message-
> Now to directly Cliff's question: yes, we considered
> proposing this to Eclipse. And we talked with a number of
> people there. And surprisingly enough - we thought those
> discussions were settled but they seem to have sprung back up
> again after Adam sent
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 04:14:22PM +0100, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> I'm quite puzzled by this proposal. As I understand it, its mainly about
> a set of Eclipse plugins for Ajax applications and the Zimbra library
> that, among other features, provides a set of SWT-like widgets.
How is that puzzlin
On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 18:27 -0500, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> Adam can certainly speak to the technical aspects of this than I can,
> but AJAX certainly causes one to rethink the traditional client/server
> boundary, in fact it tends to blur it. One can pick off small pieces
> and say this definately
On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 09:03 -0500, Adam Peller wrote:
Hi Adam! Haven't run into you since the early BSF days .. boy that was
like 7 years ago??! Looks like you're doing well and keeping busy ...
good!
I have some questions on the proposal:
> The AJAX Toolkit Framework will provide a strategic fr
dam Peller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
AJAX Toolkit Framework Proposal
0. Rationale
While the term AJAX (Asynchronous Javascript and XML) has only recently
been coined, the underlying web standards and technologies (JavaScript
a.k.a. ECMAScript, DOM, XML, SOAP, and so on) have been around
riding reason you prefer to bring this project to
> Apache?
>
> Cliff
>
>
> On 12/20/05, Adam Peller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > AJAX Toolkit Framework Proposal
> >
> > 0. Rationale
> >
> > While the term AJAX (Asynchronous Javascript an
stronger community than you would find at Eclipse? Is there
some other overriding reason you prefer to bring this project to
Apache?
Cliff
On 12/20/05, Adam Peller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> AJAX Toolkit Framework Proposal
>
> 0. Rationale
>
> While the term AJAX (Asynch
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
- why incubate an Ajax library that none of the current ASF projects
uses nor plans to use, unless I missed something?
It is a valid question, but it is also valid to point out that the
ASF has projects as diverse as TCL and SpamAssassin.
The situation is very different
Sam Ruby wrote:
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Adam Peller wrote:
AJAX Toolkit Framework Proposal
I'm quite puzzled by this proposal. As I understand it, its mainly
about a set of Eclipse plugins for Ajax applications and the Zimbra
library that, among other features, provides a set of SWT
Sylvain -
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>So the questions are:
>- is the ASF the place for Eclipse extensions? I don't deny the ability
>to _existing_ project to host their tooling, but this isn't the case here.
The framework is composed of tools that happen to use Eclipse for a
runtime, much like Java-b
bject
Re: AJAX Toolkit Framework Proposal
Please respond to
ge
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Adam Peller wrote:
AJAX Toolkit Framework Proposal
I'm quite puzzled by this proposal. As I understand it, its mainly about
a set of Eclipse plugins for Ajax applications and the Zimbra library
that, among other features, provides a set of SWT-like widgets.
Adam Peller wrote:
AJAX Toolkit Framework Proposal
I'm quite puzzled by this proposal. As I understand it, its mainly about
a set of Eclipse plugins for Ajax applications and the Zimbra library
that, among other features, provides a set of SWT-like widgets.
Also, this proposal po
Adam
>
> I offer to help mentor this.
>
> Paul
>
>
> --
> Paul Fremantle
> VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
>
> http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
>
Adam
I offer to help mentor this.
Paul
--
Paul Fremantle
VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
On 12/20/05, Adam Peller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
AJAX Toolkit Framework Proposal
0. Rationale
While the term AJAX (Asynchronous Javascript and XML) has only recently
been coined, the underlying web standards and technologies (JavaScript
a.k.a. ECMAScript, DOM, XML, SOAP, and so on) have been around for years.
Although the term is used in a
59 matches
Mail list logo
