On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 1:13 PM, David Illsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Amila, > > You asked: > > So do you mind starting the Mercury as another wscommons project and > proceed? In this way > > we may have a similar comparison at about 6 months time and see whether > what we can do to > > make a much better RM implementation. > > And my answer is yes. I'm also not keen on starting a new branch in > Sandehsa which implies that it's the next version. If we're going to > have a branch, i really wouldn't want it pre-implied that it will > replace Sandesha2 at some point. Why? Because, as I've already said, I > have some pretty serious concerns about the current design of Mercury, > so I'd really object to starting 'version 3' based on it, especially > since I doubt I'll have any time to participate in it over the next > few months, making it more likely it'll diverge from how I'd like to > see the next generation of Sandesha. Thanks david for giving a direct answer. Seems that you don't like starting any newRM implementation Anywhere in wscommos. I have already started Mercury as a WSO2 commons project. So I'll continue it from there. thanks for your comments. thanks, Amila. > > > Hence the 'rules for revolutionaries' appear to make some sense. Dims, > I assume you've seen them succeed in the past? > > From the 'rules', I assume it would also mean that there wouldn't be > any Apache sanctioned releases of Mercury unless we decide to to merge > this 'branch' and the trunk... just something more to think about. > > David > -- > David Illsley - IBM Web Services Development > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Amila Suriarachchi, WSO2 Inc.
