> Adi, > > Is this a show stopper for you? I don't understand what you are asking. I was just stating what code I've managed to get my company to agree to contribute to the project (if anyone's interested in it), what components might be useful from another open source project I work on, and what work I would be interested in focussing on.
> Technical decisions are taken after the community is bootstrapped. The > incoming code bases may be used or may even be thrown out completely. Of course things always change in the development of an open source project; I've seen that happen plenty of times just in the last 4-5 months of working on Celtix. But, I've also found it useful to try to get some consensus on where to start. In fact, I've seen people on the incubator mailing list interested in at least some degree of high-level technical overview, including potential outside dependencies. (as a side, it might help to add more detail to the current proposal.) Why wouldn't it be a good idea for the initial committers and the rest of the geroniumo community to discuss it. > Certainly there is no diktat on having to use specific outside > dependencies. End of the day, who ever is doing the work (once the > project gets going) decides on how to do things following apache's > usual process(es). 'diktat' seems like an unnecessarily strong word to use for an email where I was asking for feedback on what I would be interested in doing with my own time. I'm sorry if you got the impression that I was trying to unilaterally impose something on this project -- I hope no one else got that impression. Note that I concluded with, "I'm open to other ideas", in case people involved in this proposal think that my suggestions would actually not be a good place to start. So do you have any particular feedback on my ideas, or were you just making sure I wasn't trying to impose an iron-clad speification for the project's future work? ;-) Adi > -----Original Message----- > From: Davanum Srinivas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 5:56 PM > To: dev@geronimo.apache.org > Subject: Re: CORBA incubation proposal > > > Adi, > > Is this a show stopper for you? > > Technical decisions are taken after the community is bootstrapped. The > incoming code bases may be used or may even be thrown out completely. > Certainly there is no diktat on having to use specific outside > dependencies. End of the day, who ever is doing the work (once the > project gets going) decides on how to do things following apache's > usual process(es). > > thanks, > dims > > On 1/19/06, Sakala, Adinarayana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Before voting on this proposal or sending it to the > incubator list, I > > want to clarify the first paragraph under "Initial Source". Aside > > from the Trifork contribution, the rest of the paragraph really > > implies three different sources of code: a) reuse of > components in the > > ObjectWeb Celtix project, b) code contributed from IONA to Apache > > for this project, and c) ongoing contribution from me and the other > > initial committers from IONA. > > > > Components that we would use from the ObjectWeb Celtix project are > > the pluggable transport framework and the in dispatch infrastructure > > in order to use the ORB and IIOP transport form a XMLSchema based > > type system from JAX-B, EJB's, XMLBeans or selected API. > > > > Code that my employer could grant to Apache for development within > > this project include the ORB and IIOP transport. > > > > Most importantly, the work that me, Balaji, Prasad, Darren, Edell, > > Conrad, Dion, and David (Weir) can commit to spending time on would > > be (to start with, anyway) the creation of the CORBA transport > > utilizing required aspects from Celtix and integration with selected > > dynamic API to provide support for Geronimo and other > Apache projects. > > > > I'm open to other ideas, but I think/hope that this > combination would > > help get things started and also attract other developers to the > > project. > > > > Adi Sakala > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Alan D. Cabrera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 3:11 PM > > > To: dev@geronimo.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: CORBA incubation proposal > > > > > > > > > Fixed! > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Alan > > > > > > Trieloff, Carl wrote, On 1/19/2006 9:13 AM: > > > > The missing text... > > > > > > > > "As a side benefit the XMLShema API will also be able to > > > support other transports and binding through configuration. " > > > > > > > > Carl. > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Anders Hessellund Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 10:48 AM > > > > To: dev@geronimo.apache.org > > > > Subject: Re: CORBA incubation proposal > > > > > > > > > > > > Alan D. Cabrera wrote: > > > > > > > >>Here is the incubation proposal > > > >> > > > >>http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/CorbaProposal > > > >> > > > >>Does anyone have any comments before we vote on it? > > > > > > > > > > > > There is a half-finished sentence in the document. In > the "Initial > > > > Source" section it says: > > > > > > > > > As a side benefit the XMLShema API will also > > > > > > > > ...? > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Anders > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/ >
