Kevin Burton wrote:
>
> I think we are just on the classic "slippery slope". It will probably
> get worse before there is uniform acceptance that it exists.
Or that it splits.
One could easily imagine that a database and related projects merits its
own PMC.
- Sam Ruby
---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James Duncan Davidson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thursday, July 26, 2001, at 03:50 PM, burtonator wrote:
>
> > I might agree with that. But IMO we have a lot of things that are out of
> > scope?
> > Ant? James? Log4J? Regexp? Come on? Don'
On Thursday, July 26, 2001, at 03:50 PM, burtonator wrote:
> I might agree with that. But IMO we have a lot of things that are out
> of scope?
> Ant? James? Log4J? Regexp? Come on? Don't get me wrong.. I LOVE
> those
> projects but I think that a DB is more in-scope than they are :)
>
Y
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James Duncan Davidson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tuesday, July 24, 2001, at 04:30 PM, GOMEZ Henri wrote:
>
> > And after all sourceforge is now a really good area
> > to host OpenSource projects (java and others).
>
> This isn't Sourcefor
on 7/25/01 1:38 PM, "Pier P. Fumagalli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> burtonator at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>> But they haven't approached us... And I believe the first step should be
>>> done by them..
>>
>>
>> Not according to them. They said that they approached Jakarta about 1 - 1.5
>
James Duncan Davidson wrote:
> This isn't Sourceforge. I'm actually *not* in favor of bringing a
> database under the Jakarta umbrella. It's out of scope in my opinion --
> and scope creep is a problem that we've been facing for a long time.
It's tempting to say, well a lot of our in-scope projec
On Tuesday, July 24, 2001, at 04:30 PM, GOMEZ Henri wrote:
> And after all sourceforge is now a really good area
> to host OpenSource projects (java and others).
This isn't Sourceforge. I'm actually *not* in favor of bringing a
database under the Jakarta umbrella. It's out of scope in my o
burtonator at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> But they haven't approached us... And I believe the first step should be
>> done by them..
>
>
> Not according to them. They said that they approached Jakarta about 1 - 1.5
> years ago.
>
> Of course that was a LONG time ago :)
:) Then it was when I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
"Pier P. Fumagalli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> GOMEZ Henri at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > I totally agree and I'll be more than happy to see hsql
> > in jakarta.
>
> But they haven't approached us... And I believe the first step should be
>I'm pretty happy with our little niche on Apache... And again,
>let's try not
>to get off-topic :)
ok, end of thread :)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GOMEZ Henri at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> Sometimes competition in similar (or same) projects
>>> became a sane emulation (Pier knows what I mean :)
>>
>> We're not competing with HSQL...
>
> I don't speak of HSQL Pier :)
Well, I am, and Kevin is... Our disagreements on visions for Tomcat is
>> Sometimes competition in similar (or same) projects
>> became a sane emulation (Pier knows what I mean :)
>
>We're not competing with HSQL...
I don't speak of HSQL Pier :)
>> And after all sourceforge is now a really good area
>> to host OpenSource projects (java and others).
>
> I do
GOMEZ Henri at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I totally agree and I'll be more than happy to see hsql
> in jakarta.
But they haven't approached us... And I believe the first step should be
done by them..
> Sometimes competition in similar (or same) projects
> became a sane emulation (Pier knows
burtonator at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> "Pier P. Fumagalli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>> IMVHO, we shouldn't run after projects who, as you said, have a negative
>> inclination towards the Foundation. We have already enough stuff in ou
>> If one of their team comes up and asks, we can consider it,
>but I don't feel
>> it's our task to go out and convince them to join us...
>
>
>Yes. I understand this perspective. However I think it is
>important to note
>that sometimes cooperation is much better than competition.
I totall
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
"Pier P. Fumagalli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> IMVHO, we shouldn't run after projects who, as you said, have a negative
> inclination towards the Foundation. We have already enough stuff in our bags
> to keep us busy forever, and although the pro
burtonator at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Just an FYI.
>
> I have spent a lot of time recently working with the Hypersonic people.
>
> There are a number of issues here. It seems they talked to Apache in the past
> about moving Hypersonic under Jakarta but were turned down. Since then a lot
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
"Michael McCallum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> try this one with a BSD licence...
>
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/hsqldb
Just an FYI.
I have spent a lot of time recently working with the Hypersonic people.
There are a number of issues here
> 3. Support for the SUN JDO spec.
> >
> >-----Original Message-
> >From: David Duddleston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2001 11:58 PM
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: RE: Project idea
> >
> >
> >
> >Th
I agree with you people. Good soil to till.
-Original Message-
From: Bob Jamison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sunday, July 15, 2001 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: Project idea
>Cory L Hubert wrote:
>
>> I think it's time
ned.
>
> 1. Object or Object/Relational DB.
> 2. Support for SQL/OQL
> 3. Support for the SUN JDO spec.
>
>-Original Message-
>From: David Duddleston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2001 11:58 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject:
IL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Project idea
>
>
>
> Here are more points to consider when evaluating canidates
> and when defining the project goals:
>
> * 100% Java (of course)
> * Copyright clearance (including any required third party components)
> * Supports b
Dougherty's pointers, thanks Mike).
Tal
> -Original Message-
> From: Cory L Hubert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2001 3:04 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Project idea
>
>
> I think it's time for it as well. Ora
rom: David Duddleston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2001 11:58 PM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: RE: Project idea
>>
>>
>>
>> There is a pretty good Java SQL Relational DB called Mckoi, but the darn
>> thing is GPL and I have s
hem a call ;-)
Tal
> -Original Message-
> From: David Duddleston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2001 11:58 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Project idea
>
>
>
> There is a pretty good Java SQL Relational DB called Mckoi, but the darn
3. Support for the SUN JDO spec.
-Original Message-
From: David Duddleston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2001 11:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Project idea
There is a pretty good Java SQL Relational DB called Mckoi, but the darn
thing is GPL and I hav
There is a pretty good Java SQL Relational DB called Mckoi, but the darn
thing is GPL and I have sent about 6 emails trying to get them to change the
license to an ASL or equivalent, but I have had no luck. They won't even
change to LGPL.
hsql Database on sourceforge has a good license and works
Cory L Hubert wrote:
>
> Why not. A relational/ohject database. One that may be queried with
> standard SQL and OQL. It should probably work with the up and coming Sun
> Microsystems JDO spec.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Tal Dayan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturda
Why not. A relational/ohject database. One that may be queried with
standard SQL and OQL. It should probably work with the up and coming Sun
Microsystems JDO spec.
-Original Message-
From: Tal Dayan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2001 5:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PR
29 matches
Mail list logo
