On 1/18/06, Tim OBrien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Rahul, my emails are a tad long, eh? Apologies in advance. > <snip/>
Nah, that was a comment about the length after *I* replied to your email, and subsequently found it better to fragment it out into bite size chunks in separate threads. > > > > 3. Is SCXML appropriate for Commons? > > > <snap/> > > > > Understood. Let's just acknowledge that if scxml is a successful component, > and if it > experiences the level of interest I think it warrants, it could very well go > the route of > httpclient. > <snip/> Ack'ed. It can potentially go places, thats my opinion as well. > At the moment, it is a simple, narrow component focused on scxml. I think > it would be wise to > think about the long term. Jakarta is going to undergo some transitions over > the next year (see > general@ thread from last week), and during that transition we should put a > flag on scxml as one > of the components that we need to think about as being qualitatively > different from something like > Commons Lang. > > But, short-term, promotion to proper makes sense. > > <snip/> > > You are right about Jakarta state transitions not being nearly as clean as an > ideal state machine. > <snip/> All this makes sense to me. -Rahul --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
