Hi,
I am not commiter and it is not a veto. It is possible to implement The
best RPC for JAVA, but RMI will be better :)
I think you are wasting your time, but good luck.
At 11:39 2002-01-05 +, you wrote:
Juozas,
snip
I see no ARMI advantages.
I am not stopping anyone useing RMI if they
Juozas,
snip
I see no ARMI advantages.
I am not stopping anyone useing RMI if they want to. I note in the
proposal it is no good for EJB. It's other limitations are noted too.
It does have advatages, just read the Proposal.
I guess we (you and I) will never meet in the middle. I'll feel
On Saturday, January 5, 2002, at 11:39 AM, Paul Hammant wrote:
Juozas,
snip
I see no ARMI advantages.
I am not stopping anyone useing RMI if they want to. I note in the
proposal it is no good for EJB. It's other limitations are noted too.
It does have advatages, just read the
Folks,
Any thoughts for ARMI (though it needs a rename as Async RMI already
used). Is commons the place for it? Yes/No?
Regards,
- Paul H
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Commoners,
I have pushed a working verision of ARMI into commons-scratchpad and
anyone with Ant should be able to build and test it.
To become a proper commons project what needs to happen? Normally
Jakarta rules insist that a project has an active developer community
behind it before it
