On Sat, 2006-04-08 at 17:45 -0400, Rahul Akolkar wrote: <snip>
i've had a think and i'm +1 > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > [X] +1 Move [scxml] to Commons Proper > [ ] +0 I am fine with this move > [ ] -0 I am not too keen, because ... > [ ] -1 I am against this move, because ... > ------------------------------------------------------------------ there seems to be plenty of user traffic: hopefully some of this will be translated into developer activity. it's probably the most actively developed sandbox component and looks reasonable polished. it's used elsewhere at apache. the scope may (at first glance) be a little problematic. it's an implementation of an specification. not all implementations of that specification would be suitable for the commons. however, i think the SCXML codebase is sufficiently brick-ish to qualify. it's a small engine with minimal dependencies (several of the other xml components here are similar). it's a library which isn't a framework. good enough for me. perhaps this could be made a little clearer in the proposal: i'd prefer a tighter definition perhaps talking about a lightweight engine. > This VOTE will remain open for a minimum of 72 hours. seems very short: best to allow at least a week. i also prefer noting a time. - robert
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
