On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 6/16/11 8:22 AM, Matt Benson wrote: >> (accidentally sent to Jochen personally before, sorry) >> >> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Jochen Wiedmann >> <jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Considering [1], I'd say it's more relevant now than, arguably, ever. >>> Are you sure, that's related? Reading [2], my understanding is that >>> JCS doesn't aim to implement JSR-107, but to be "close to". >> My point was that if we have a good cache library @ Commons, I would >> assume we could build on that to implement the JSR (if the TCK is >> licensed such that we can actually use it, no guarantee there) if we >> want to. Perhaps an incorrect assumption, but I have a difficult time >> with the concept of "can't be done." > > +1 - whoever picks this thing up can do whatever they want with it. > I suspect all of the "I" references in [2] are obsolete :) Looks > like we have several people interested in working on it, so I see no > reason not to let them do it here.
+1. Just code on its own = -1. As long as committers are coming, +1. >From a bigger picture point of view - I want Jakarta to go to the Attic. These components, as with many in Commons, have kept themselves just about alive and keep Jakarta out of the Attic. Moving them over to Commons is no real change to themselves, no real impact to Commons in the worst case and a big step towards closing down Jakarta. Then Rahul just has to convince BSF, Cactus and JMeter that they'd be just the same as quiet TLPs :) Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
