On Aug 13, 2006, at 7:05 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
As the champion for JINI, I suppose it behooves me to try and get this untangled.I'm not a Jini expert, but my understanding is that it is it's own spececosystem. Therefore, I'm against having one project doing software implementation that is called "Jini", just as I'd be against projects like "Apache JCP", "Apache W3C", "Apache OASIS", "Apache ECMA" etc.
As I understand it, Jini is not equivalent to JCP or any of the other orgs you name here. It's an org with a tighter focus.
That said, it appears that it is the intent of the Jini community to have multiple implementations of the spec. [1]
However, we do have a chance here to host the governance and spec process for JINI.
And I'd say that this purpose is very much in line with what we did with JDO. The project has both the spec and tck but not an implementation.
Therefore, I'd like to propose that we create two podlings, one for JINI governance, and one for building the implementation and community aroundthe working code that has been proposed.
And if the "spec podling" focused on the spec and compliance test aspects (the org.jini stuff), and the "impl podling" focused on the implementation aspects (the com.sun.jini stuff), I think it would be a lot cleaner.
It would appear then that the "Apache Jini" podling would be the former, and the "to be named" podling the latter. Fortunately, the incubator should be warmed up for a naming discussion.
Craig [1] http://www.jini.org/wiki/Category:Introduction_to_Jini
geir --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
