I am quite late but
+1
Kinga

On 3/3/06, Pinder, Simeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi Sal,
>
> This sounds good.  Bringing IBM on board and adding Eclipse tooling
> support would be great!
>
> +1
>
> -Simeon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sal Campana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 1:56 PM
> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Muse++ - The future of the Muse Project
>
>
> We are currently looking at merging the three Apache projects (WSRF,
> Pubscribe and Muse) into a single entity under the Muse project.  While
> I have done some work on this there have been other things happening
> which have made me reconsider the project as a whole.
>
> We have been talking with a team at IBM, whom we work with through the
> spec committees, to do a joint next-generation implementation of WSDM,
> and its sub-specifications.  The implementation would not only position
> the WSDM effort in a more future-proof way (i.e. move towards WSDM 2.0),
>
> but continue to move the project forward in a positive direction.  IBM
> has code which they would like to contribute as the foundation for this
> effort.  The code will initially be run in Axis2 which would please
> those who are seeking an Axis2 implementation of WSDM (WSRF,WSRN, etc).
>
>
> IBM is willing to contribute base code, which will be reviewed by us,
> and developers to the effort.  IBM would like to be part of moving the
> Apache WSDM effort forward, and is excited about the possibilities of
> being part of the project.  They are even planning on contributing
> tooling around this effort to the Eclipse Project.
>
> I believe this to be the right thing to do for the direction of the Muse
>
> project.  Bringing IBM to the project will entice more users, generate
> more interest in the project and bring more active committers moving the
>
> effort forward.
>
> Here is my +1 for this effort.  I hope others will join me in support of
>
> this.
>
> I apologize that I have not been forthcoming thus far, however I had to
> consider the legal side of things before making any statements regarding
>
> this.
>

Reply via email to