On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 10:40:32PM -0400, Michael Becke wrote: > Hi Oleg, >
Hi Mike > In general I think this looks good. I have a few questions/suggestions: > > - We should probably be a little more clear regarding naming. For > example I would state that Jakarta HTTP Components is one possible > name, but that we are open for suggestions. I agree we certainly should mention that we are prepared to compromise as far as the project name is concerned. The project chapter is probably not the best place to do so, though. I think we should ask Henri to mention in his message to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list that people might want to state if they object to the project charter solely because of the project name and suggest a different name We also want to be more > clear regarding the future of the HttpClient name. My impression is > that we will keep the name and release an HTTP client (called > HttpClient) built from the components. Such is my intention as well. > - We should also work on the wording of the following statement: > "Jakarta Http Components project DOES NOT define an application API > on top of the low level transport API". If I'm reading you correctly > you're trying to allay the fears of those who think we're creating a > new servlet API, right? We do however plan to release a client side > API (HttpClient), but this line could be read to preclude that. > I personally see no contradiction here. HttpClient is a transport library, not an application. It defines a client-side transport API. It does not enforce any application aspects: no configuration file(s), no GUI or CLI interface, and more importantly no HTML (or any other content) processing. In short HttpClient is not a browser. However, if you find the above statement misleading please go ahead and change it > What do you think? I should have some time tomorrow evening for > writing, assuming we want to make these changes. > Please do so. It would be really appreciated Cheers, Oleg > Thanks, > > Mike > > On 9/11/05, Oleg Kalnichevski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Folks, > > > > There has been no new input regarding the new project charter for quite > > a while. Does this mean the proposed draft largely represents the vision > > of the HttpClient community of what the project should be like and what > > we should be concerned with? Do you need more time to think things over? > > Do you think we are ready to present the case before the Jakarta PMC? > > Please share your ideas. > > > > Oleg > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
