And even if Oracle did not find a project like Tamaya suitable as RI for the upcoming config standard, it would still be in a good position to act as compatible implementation along the lines of e.g. Johnzon, Open WebBeans, etc. at Apache. So I assume it should not be in a too bad position.
Cheers, Werner On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 11:16 AM, Anatole Tresch <atsti...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah, I submitted it, with the comment, that anyone lese can still change > it, to ensure we are in time now ;) > Unless other projects we have opportunities to evolve in the project, in > adoption and we have good attention on > different kind of conferences ;) > > Have a nice day! > > 2016-10-07 10:04 GMT+02:00 P. Ottlinger <pottlin...@apache.org>: > > > Am 07.10.2016 um 10:00 schrieb Oliver B. Fischer: > > > I read the report and think it is fine. Please read it too and have a > > > look at John's comment: > > > > > > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/October2016 > > > > Did we really loose any active committers? > > > > I thought Mark left as a mentor only. > > > > Apart from that I don't think that Tamaya has more problems than other > > projects (e.g. Creadur). > > > > Nothing we can do at the moment except continue :-) > > > > Thanks for submitting it in time. > > > > Cheers, > > Phil > > > > > > -- > *Anatole Tresch* > PPMC Member Apache Tamaya > JCP Star Spec Lead > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1* > *maketechsimple.wordpress.com <http://maketechsimple.wordpress.com/> * > *Twitter: @atsticks, @tamayaconf* >
