I think this would be less contentious then you think. Basically if you add the *oh the power of those who do* principal then you'll probably get some list chatter but just say "are you volunteering" and they'll nearly immediately shutup. If you get two volunteers in the same area then its quite simple: you have an alternative which will make for a better distribution anyhow! (You'll have the opportunity to develop better interfaces and coupling etc in the "distribution" or "platform")...
>On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 15:32:12 -0000 "Tim Hyde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote. >Moving slightly retrograde on the proposal (in case we missed something ...) > >I think my suggestion for 'alternative to J2EE' probably muddies the waters. >There are a lot of candidates for inclusion, and it would be a horrible >mail-fest even to think about choosing them. One focus must be to make >selecting and evaluation a tool a relatively lightweight task for the >intending user - because if it's part of this platform, (s)he will *know* it >delivers. > >GJT comes to mind as something to be added to Leo's list of similar efforts, >and I expect the list would end up quite long. > >Perhaps one thing that could be sensibly done is to strengthen the packaging >and market visibility of the things in the Jakarta family ? A great deal of >pre-selection has already been done, and there is already a project name - >Jakarta. 'Jakarta Development Kit' might not be the best proposal, but there >again ... > >There needn't be any intention on 'family' grounds to exclude any other >toolset that was seen to be useful, but I can't quite get my head round the >difficulties of choosing candidates or the weakness of too much dilution. >Again, these are things that Jakarta has inherently worked through. > >Does this make the proposal any more practical ? Are there serious areas >which Jakarta is missing ? > >Perhaps one of the more useful things we might be able to add are design >papers un-biassed by the issues of market orthodoxies - even to the extent >of pointing out areas where the Jakarta technologies aren't the best. Or is >that getting too altruistic ?-) > >- Tim > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: Jakarta General List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: 25 February 2002 11:00 >Subject: RE: The Complete Server Platform? > > >> >> 'kay. Summary: >> (everyone, please correct and add to?) >> >> --------------- >> SIMILAR EFFORTS >> --------------- >> Here's a list of similar efforts that I know of... >> (requirments: >> 1) some kind of application platform >> 2) 100ava >> 3) open source) >> >> JBoss >> Jahia >> Enhydra >> EAS >> OPEN ENTERPRISE DISTRIBUTION >> >> Candidate Components For Inclusion >> ---------------------------------- >> Jakarta: >> Apache XML: >> SourceForge: >> Exolab: >> (...) >> >> Clearly, there are loads. We need some criteria. > > > > > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
