Hey David, I have no problem with you representing Apache, though I still would be interested in participating myself as an individual . . .what do you think the weekly commitment is?
More importantly, how do you envision the RI being implemented? If the spec can't be discussed on list before release, how do we avoid a code drop like before? Do you think it would be possible to have a private list for commiters that signed an NDA to communicate about drafts? Any other creative ideas? David On 11/30/05, David Sean Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nick Lothian wrote: > > > >>>> > >>> > >>> Yeah. > >>> > >>> Have you considered asking for membership? > >>> > >> > >> > >> Yes, actually I applied eariler today as an individual. The other > >> option is to apply as an "organization", but I wasn't too sure how > >> representing Pluto would work. . .. I'd like to be involved and > >> represent our community either way. We'll see what happens. > >> > >> > > I think Apache has a JCP membership and so committers (members?) can > > represent Apache on JSRs. I think Geir Magnusson knows the most about that. > > > > Nick > > > > > > > I represented Apache on the 1.0 spec. > (Im also a Pluto founding committer, albeit not very active these days, > Jetspeed is pretty consuming with the new release upcoming) > > You can see Apache's name as an Expert Group member in section PLT.1.8 > of the spec. > > I was planning on representing Apache again, but if one of the other > Pluto committers would like the experience I can step down (note you > have to travel once or twice a year or so for Face to Face meetings, > usually 3-5 days in length). There are also phone conference meetings, > and lots of email > > What I really did not like about JSR-168, is that I could not discuss > the process on the Apache lists, since they are public. I am going to > see if I can make any progress in making 286 a more public effort this > time. > > > >
