ymond NANEON a écrit :
Hi List,
I updated my dev's computer from java 7 to java 8.
When I try to launch my app, I get a fatal error (WARN NSLog - A fatal
exception occurred: com/webobjects/foundation/NSTimeZone$__NSTZPeriod) on
foundation framework and the app shutdown.
Have I miss a pa
Hi List,
I updated my dev's computer from java 7 to java 8.
When I try to launch my app, I get a fatal error (WARN NSLog - A fatal
exception occurred: com/webobjects/foundation/NSTimeZone$__NSTZPeriod) on
foundation framework and the app shutdown.
Have I miss a parameter in propertie
R-168 it should run in other
portals as well! So we can do a WO-Form builder, or WO-Wiki, or quickly
integrate the Project Wonder stuff as portlets.
Marcelo Ruiz Camauër
Marc Oesch wrote:
Yes, of course. I didn't mean that we should
build Wikis etc to use for
the WebObjects Founda
Hello,
> The decision then just lies with the author(s) as to whether they
> believe there will be enough demand for such material to
> sufficiently remunerate them for their efforts.
To my way of thinking, it is not a matter of a paper copy or of
remuneration (writing a book is easily the leas
On Aug 22, 2006, at 8:47 PM, Q wrote:
On 23/08/2006, at 6:20 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
On Aug 22, 2006, at 8:01 AM, Michael Warner wrote:
If I may wax old-school for a moment -- actual, physical books
can make a huge difference in this situation.
I will argue (from some experience) that the si
hi thomasOn 23.08.2006, at 00:15, Thomas wrote:Why make it so complex? Why not have the basic unit being a Page, with all Pages having an optional parent, thus making a navigable hierarchy as deep as you want to go? Each Page has its own HTMLcontent, and Apache rewrite rules can be used to access t
On 23/08/2006, at 6:20 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
On Aug 22, 2006, at 8:01 AM, Michael Warner wrote:
I found this post to be one of the most spot on. Senior WO
developers have stepped up on the list, post WWDC 2006. That is
both praiseworthy and
reassuring. Yet the fact remains that apart f
On 23/08/2006, at 6:20 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
On Aug 22, 2006, at 8:01 AM, Michael Warner wrote:
I found this post to be one of the most spot on. Senior WO
developers have stepped up on the list, post WWDC 2006. That is
both praiseworthy and
reassuring. Yet the fact remains that apart fro
Just my 2c worth.
Why make it so complex? Why not have the basic unit being a Page,
with all Pages having an optional parent, thus making a navigable
hierarchy as deep as you want to go? Each Page has its own
HTMLcontent, and Apache rewrite rules can be used to access them
using URLs like
Hi All
opensource wo cms.
so whose gonna send in the first schema?
heck here goes:
ContentFolder (Hierarchical) <-->> ContentFolder2Content <<-> Content
<->> ContentItems <->> ContentItems2Assets <<-> Asset <-> AssetData
AssetFolder (Hierarchical) <->> AssetFolder2Asset <<-> Asset <->
Ass
On Aug 22, 2006, at 8:01 AM, Michael Warner wrote:
I found this post to be one of the most spot on. Senior WO
developers have stepped up on the list, post WWDC 2006. That is
both praiseworthy and
reassuring. Yet the fact remains that apart from the important
issues of lack of marketing
On Aug 22, 2006, at 11:02 AM, Pascal Robert wrote:
Actually, I think writing a new WO app for the community site will
not be hard. For a start, we only need an admin with textarea
boxes with TinyMCE to update the pages. It's cheap, but it can be
done really fast.
If you're thinking alon
On Aug 22, 2006, at 11:32 AM, Marc Oesch wrote:
Janine just started such a page here...
Thanks - we posted this at the same time. :)
I just want to repeat that wishes are not turned into reality by
magic, so it would be best if the various proponents become promoters
and start working on stu
Hello,
wodev had been absorbed by wikipedia (which I consider a nice move),
so let us do a non-encyclopaedic wiki; just an informal one which
announce to us the running projects' status, with their respective
links.
Janine just started such a page here...
http://www.objectstyle.org/confluence
Le 06-08-22 à 04:04, Yann Bizeul a écrit :
My advice is that if we don't use WO to host the web site, we can
use anything completely unrelated to WO, choosing a solution based
on administration simplicity and accessibility, no matter it is a
step backward technologicaly speaking.
Personn
I found this post to be one of the most spot on. Senior WO
developers have stepped up on the list, post WWDC 2006. That is both
praiseworthy and
reassuring. Yet the fact remains that apart from the important
issues of lack of marketing and of built-in, up-to-date user-
interface and other
I agree with Johan, but I think we should create a website that is a
collection of simple / elegant / graceful mini projects. It would be
cool to make each page have a download the source link with the
complete code for the mini project.
My suggested technical requirements:
(1) Fast
(2) W
I am a bit surprised about all this discussion of using non-
WebObjects solutions for a WebObjects site. As far as I know there is
-a WebObjects wiki (http://wodev.spearway.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/WODev.)
-a Webobjects CMS (http://sourceforge.net/projects/gvcsitemaker/)
-a Webobjects BugTracker
Hello mbj,
That would force us to collaborate from the very beginning (while
better avoiding the trap of reproducing WO resource sites already
available).
I say we use Wonder 3 heavily for this (and document it as we use it).
If you and others volunteer for this, all the better. That would be
On 22 Aug 2006, at 10:04, Yann Bizeul wrote:
My advice is that if we don't use WO to host the web site, we can
use anything completely unrelated to WO, choosing a solution based
on administration simplicity and accessibility, no matter it is a
step backward technologicaly speaking.
The a
My advice is that if we don't use WO to host the web site, we can use
anything completely unrelated to WO, choosing a solution based on
administration simplicity and accessibility, no matter it is a step
backward technologicaly speaking.
Personnaly, I think we should run a basic solution us
On 22 Aug 2006, at 06:31, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't have a strong preference myself, but since Pascal has taken
the initiative to design a community web site (which is very nice,
btw) and is offering to help run the CMS, I think he should be able
to choose which one we use. So I'll
On Aug 21, 2006, at 8:27 PM, M. Blanc wrote:
May I sugest Pier instead? Pier is written in Smalltalk —the
inspiration behind Objective-C— and based on Seaside, an
application server originally inspired in WebObjects, so we are
cousins. It is also simple enough to install and, even better, t
On 22 Aug 2006, at 05:01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 21, 2006, at 7:16 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
I tried Magnolia a year and half ago, I really like it. We can
get it to run in 15 minutes. Anyone want to host it ? It's a
good alternative until we use a WO CMS.
I can provide hostin
On Aug 21, 2006, at 7:16 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
I tried Magnolia a year and half ago, I really like it. We can get
it to run in 15 minutes. Anyone want to host it ? It's a good
alternative until we use a WO CMS.
I can provide hosting space if Pascal can get it set up (I've never
inst
- "Generic" Java CMS
Lenya
http://lenya.apache.org/
Magnolia
http://www.magnolia.info/en/magnolia.html
I tried Magnolia a year and half ago, I really like it. We can get
it to run in 15 minutes. Anyone want to host it ? It's a good
alternative until we use a WO CMS.
__
Yes, of course. I didn't mean that we should build Wikis etc to use for
the WebObjects Foundation.
I'm relieved :)
I meantmindshare is created by providing
working solutions.
Apache became a powerhouse because they built/supported a fully
functional
Showing how WOnderful WO
is wi
s, of course. I didn't mean that we should build Wikis etc to use for
the WebObjects Foundation. I meantmindshare is created by providing
working solutions.
Apache became a powerhouse because they built/supported a fully
functional
HTTP server that had all the bells and whistles necessary.
Just some thoughts after going through the archives of the past months
and weeks for the new Wiki.
My opinion would be to get things started and online instead of
waiting for the perfect solution written in WebObjects.
The Wiki is in place for editing projects and colleting ideas, thanks
to Andr
On Aug 21, 2006, at 12:16 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 21, 2006, at 12:04 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
At present, the source is open but the development is not. We
(GVC) are acting as gatekeepers to maintain the integrity of the
design and source.
A wise move. Although fully open sour
Well that maybe so. So maybe a concerted Wonder effort? An open
source Wonder CMS?
Something where we can all donate some business object type extension.
E-Zines
CSS
AJAX
Calendar
Subscriptions
E-Commerce
CMS
Gallery
RSS
etc.
And finally documentation and a simple installation wizard.
And, al
On Aug 21, 2006, at 12:04 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
At present, the source is open but the development is not. We
(GVC) are acting as gatekeepers to maintain the integrity of the
design and source.
A wise move. Although fully open source is a great goal, the reality
is that it's very risky
On Aug 19, 2006, at 12:27 PM, James Cicenia wrote:
I concur +5
Every time I dip into the php waters I am amazed at all the
available source/solutions
Ecosystems seem to start around Content Management Systems. Maybe
this is GVC?!
GVC.SiteMaker is what I assume you mean. Keep in
Hello guys,
My company (Active WO Supporter) is willing to offer a room (free) in
it's datacenter if a server need a home (datacenter in switzerland).
Physical administration would also be provided.
We don't have any server to provide at the moment.
So, if anything builds up and need a host
Forgot my webserver specs. Dual 1.8 Ghz, 2 GB Ram, 1 TB Hard Drive Space. 768k
dsl now but will get T-1 if necessary.
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_
I will also make my webserver available for free to anyone who wants to start
this Foundation. You guys tell me what you need and I'll make it happen. My
webserver and time are at the group's disposal!
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail ha
On Aug 19, 2006, at 3:01 PM, Simon Mclean wrote:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/oce/
On 19 Aug 2006, at 18:54, Arturo Pérez wrote:
Content Management:
There are so many content management applications out there,
where's the opensource WO-based one? (Yeah, I know, GVC just came
out).
I concur +5
Every time I dip into the php waters I am amazed at all the
available source/solutions
Ecosystems seem to start around Content Management Systems. Maybe
this is GVC?!
If so we should all rally around it and start making plugins, guides,
installers, etc.
We just seem
http://sourceforge.net/projects/oce/On 19 Aug 2006, at 18:54, Arturo Pérez wrote:Content Management: There are so many content management applications out there, where's the opensource WO-based one? (Yeah, I know, GVC just came out). ___
Do not post ad
Le 06-08-19 à 13:54, Arturo Pérez a écrit :
Excellent and amazing comments all.
Having gone against management to use WO and having had to explain
many times to the ignorant J2EE/Struts/Hibernate crowd I have one
humble suggestion.
Build complete opensource solutions based on WO. For a
Excellent and amazing comments all.
Having gone against management to use WO and having had to explain
many times to the ignorant J2EE/Struts/Hibernate crowd I have one
humble suggestion.
Build complete opensource solutions based on WO. For a system with
such fantastic ease of use in cre
On Aug 17, 2006, at 10:12 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
On Aug 16, 2006, at 11:15 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
herding cats
Like this: http://video.google.com/videoplay?
docid=7635587316493151891
Yes, exactly!
As far as I'm concerned that is the Best. Superbowl. Ad. Ever.
Except for one s
On Aug 15, 2006, at 2:36 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:IMHO, any sort of paid advertising would be a waste of money. Like Simon says (sorry, too tempting to resist) we need more presentations, blogs, articles, websites, demos etc. We need to get the knowledge of what WO is, what is can do, and why someone
On Aug 16, 2006, at 11:15 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
herding cats
Like this: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7635587316493151891
--
Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their
overall knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific
prob
http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/08/17/more.apple.patent.filings/Found reference to some nice generic ;-) text (likely) about WebObjects in a patent application by Apple:"Some or all of a Web page can be generated dynamically using input received in a returned page, generated at runtime, or retriev
On Aug 16, 2006, at 11:28 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
If people generally think this is a good idea, then maybe we
should ask for volunteers? We only need 3 or 4 people, I think,
since the task will be mostly answering procedural questions and
giving people the confidence that they can move forw
Sounds like a great thing for you to put on the "tasks in progress"
page once I have it created. I am still on vacation, so it could be
next week before I get that taken care of. There are just not enough
hours in the day!
janine
On Aug 16, 2006, at 2:02 PM, Joe Little wrote:
I'm unsur
Excellent. Here are my suggestions: 1) I think the first paragraph
still sounds a bit daunting and needs to be something like "simply
develop basic applications to highly-scalable, sophisticated
applications". That way you say - hey you can pick this up really
easily, which is how technolog
On Aug 16, 2006, at 2:02 PM, Joe Little wrote:
I'm unsure if this warrants an "elders" role, but at WWDC and since
I've talked with various people about deployments. In some shape or
form I'll volunteer to lead the rpm/deb/pkg/depot/etc packaging (or
recipes, if license is not permitting) of th
I'm unsure if this warrants an "elders" role, but at WWDC and since
I've talked with various people about deployments. In some shape or
form I'll volunteer to lead the rpm/deb/pkg/depot/etc packaging (or
recipes, if license is not permitting) of the jars, wotaskd,
javamonitor, and webobjects adapt
Way to go Jerry! That sounds great.
On Aug 16, 2006, at 1:24 PM, Jerry W. Walker wrote:
In a spirit of moving forward in an unorganized manner, I noticed
the first line on the first page of the WO wikibook:
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Programming:WebObjects
which said:
WebObject
In a spirit of moving forward in an unorganized manner, I noticed the
first line on the first page of the WO wikibook:
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Programming:WebObjects
which said:
WebObjects is a suite of Mac OS X and Mac OS X Server
frameworks and tools that helps a develope
On Aug 16, 2006, at 12:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 15, 2006, at 4:31 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
What we don't need is for most people to sit on the sidelines and
wait around for the few to conjure up the future of WebObjects.
To get the most people involved, we need to have the lowe
On Aug 16, 2006, at 9:02 AM, Ricardo Strausz wrote:
The last time I looked at the WOLips code, it was, um, er, not
very well commented.
comments ... comments ... nope, haven't heard of em.
LOL
Real developers don't have time to comment!
Good developers write self-explanatory code...
no
The last time I looked at the WOLips code, it was, um, er, not
very well commented.
comments ... comments ... nope, haven't heard of em.
LOL
Real developers don't have time to comment!
Good developers write self-explanatory code...
no need to comment.
Dino
___
On Aug 16, 2006, at 1:05 AM, Cornelius Jaeger wrote:
how about janine, anjo, and chuck.
they talk the talk and walk the walk
I would add Mike to that list; that way we would have one person
from WOProject, one from WOLips, one to guide newbies and one to
guide more experienced people. Bu
Yes, but you can't make people work in a particular way - if you do,
you immediately start losing potential contributors.
Besides, this discussion has been about writing text, but writing
code live on a Wiki would be a wee bit difficult. :)
If no-one comes up with any strenuous objections i
I agree -- In a lot of cases people don't like to start from a blank
page, but if there is some structure that people can fill in, they're
more likely to submit content. As Kieran pointed out, it's the
beauty of the Wiki.
ms
On Aug 16, 2006, at 11:39 AM, Kieran Kelleher wrote:
Ah, don't
Ah, don't be shy :-) Make an outline of the small chunks that make up
the big tutorial and work on the small chunks as you get time
who knows, you can ask for help when you are stuck in one chunk while
working and others can jump in and help! That's the wonder of
wiki's . if someon
On Aug 16, 2006, at 11:14 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 16, 2006, at 4:49 AM, Kieran Kelleher wrote:
Why not just sign up on confluence and start your tutorial today?
I signed up last night, but this isn't something I would want to
work on in a public space. I do lots of editing an
On Aug 16, 2006, at 4:49 AM, Kieran Kelleher wrote:
Why not just sign up on confluence and start your tutorial today?
I signed up last night, but this isn't something I would want to work
on in a public space. I do lots of editing and back-tracking before
I consider it finished, and I pre
Cornelius,Why not just sign up on confluence WOLips today and put some content there?Regards, KieranOn Aug 16, 2006, at 4:05 AM, Cornelius Jaeger wrote:hi allDespite my assertion from yesterday that we can't form a Foundation out of thin air, I do think we need some leadership soon. We are already
Why not just sign up on confluence and start your tutorial today?
On Aug 16, 2006, at 3:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 15, 2006, at 4:31 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
What we don't need is for most people to sit on the sidelines and
wait around for the few to conjure up the future of WebObje
hi all Despite my assertion from yesterday that we can't form a Foundation out of thin air, I do think we need some leadership soon. We are already seeing people posting to the list asking what would be useful to do and where they should put it, and someone really should be designated to answer t
On Aug 15, 2006, at 4:31 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
What we don't need is for most people to sit on the sidelines and
wait around for the few to conjure up the future of WebObjects. To
get the most people involved, we need to have the lowest barriers
to participation possible.
I have been fol
Am 16.08.2006 um 03:10 schrieb Mike Schrag:
The last time I looked at the WOLips code, it was, um, er, not
very well commented.
comments ... comments ... nope, haven't heard of em.
And, frankly, I think the time would be better spent to document
things that people actually use, as opposed
On Aug 15, 2006, at 6:12 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
On Aug 15, 2006, at 11:15 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
I am more in favor of the approach taken by the companies behind
projects like Apache Geronimo (an open source spec-compliant J2EE
server) - if you are to invest money in certain technology
On Aug 15, 2006, at 6:55 PM, Ian Joyner wrote:
On 16/08/2006, at 11:18 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
On Aug 15, 2006, at 6:10 PM, Mike Schrag wrote:
The last time I looked at the WOLips code, it was, um, er, not
very well commented.
comments ... comments ... nope, haven't heard of em.
LOL
Rea
On 16/08/2006, at 11:18 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
On Aug 15, 2006, at 6:10 PM, Mike Schrag wrote:
The last time I looked at the WOLips code, it was, um, er, not
very well commented.
comments ... comments ... nope, haven't heard of em.
LOL
Real developers don't have time to comment!
Agree a
On Aug 15, 2006, at 6:10 PM, Mike Schrag wrote:
The last time I looked at the WOLips code, it was, um, er, not
very well commented.
comments ... comments ... nope, haven't heard of em.
LOL
Real developers don't have time to comment!
--
Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to i
The last time I looked at the WOLips code, it was, um, er, not very
well commented.
comments ... comments ... nope, haven't heard of em.
ms
___
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects
, I will help out as long as the feeling of deja vu is not too strong. :)janineOn Aug 14, 2006, at 10:44 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:Ok, let's start talking about a WebObjects Foundation (or Alliance, or whatever).Why do we need such a thing ?The Foundation will be responsible to market WO, collecting
On Aug 15, 2006, at 10:04 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The best advice I can give here is that it needs to be as easy as
possible for people to contribute. Lessons from the past once
again; in my old life documentation had to be in Docbook format
and basically ready to publish, so very
On Aug 15, 2006, at 11:15 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
I am more in favor of the approach taken by the companies behind
projects like Apache Geronimo (an open source spec-compliant J2EE
server) - if you are to invest money in certain technology that you
do not control, change the rules and
On Aug 15, 2006, at 10:21 AM, Marc Oesch wrote:
An interesting post I got from this link happens to be "Project
Able" responding to the popularity of RoR for Java developers...
http://blogs.opensymphony.com/plightbo/2006/08/
project_able_a_complete_java_w.html
Here is a good talking poin
On Aug 15, 2006, at 10:21 AM, Marc Oesch wrote:
An interesting post I got from this link happens to be "Project
Able" responding to the popularity of RoR for Java developers...
http://blogs.opensymphony.com/plightbo/2006/08/
project_able_a_complete_java_w.html
Here is a good talking poin
nd add a few more things
from Pascal's list, and so on.
If you still want to go for the Foundation right away, I will help
out as long as the feeling of deja vu is not too strong. :)
janine
On Aug 14, 2006, at 10:44 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
Ok, let's start talking abo
Hi All
Just wanted to chip in and say that ready made applications that are
used in the real world and JustWork™ can generate hype, allow
potential developers and users of a technology to get started quickly
and lower the learning curve substantially for new implementors. I
remember when
I think we need to have a very good, published, review of the various
frameworks out there:
GVC, D2W, Noxymo, Wonder, LEWO, Apollo, others???
...LEWOStuff
(http://homepage.mac.com/andrewlindesay/le/page_wo.html)
___
Andrew Lindesay
www.lindesay.co.nz
On Aug 15, 2006, at 2:42 PM, Simon Mclean wrote:
- James Cicenia
PS: I have a dedicated first gen XServe running WebObjects that I
could offer cycles on.
i could possibly also wangle a dedicated xserve from my company -
would have to check, but i am pretty sure it's available. i am also
I think we need to have a very good, published, review of the various frameworks out there: GVC, D2W, Noxymo, Wonder, LEWO, Apollo, others???the frightening thing is i have been working with webobjects for 7 years and i've not even heard of LEWO or Apollo...How about a plug-in/component center?woc
On Aug 15, 2006, at 1:04 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't completely agree here. Obviously we have no say in the
direction of the product; Apple is going to serve their internal
needs first and there probably won't be any cycles left over for
anything else. But I do think there is va
Any talk of Google Adwords frightens me. How did you hear about ruby
on rails ? python ? tapestry ? struts ? Was it that you stumbled on a
Google Adword, or was it the buzz generated by the respective
communities and the knock on reviews on cnet, slashdot and wired ?
I agree here. As long WO is
Little late to the discussions, however, I will still throw in my two
cents
I think we need to have a very good, published, review of the various
frameworks out there:
GVC, D2W, Noxymo, Wonder, LEWO, Apollo, others???
How about a plug-in/component center?
The new wiki is a gre
On Aug 15, 2006, at 9:17 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
To expand on this point... Building an association with a goal of
promoting a proprietary code base (with the owner not being a part
of it) is an exercise in futility. If your are a business owner
whose business depends on WebObjects techn
Not admonishing :) Just making sure that everyone is recognized ...
ms
On Aug 15, 2006, at 12:18 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 15, 2006, at 9:07 AM, Mike Schrag wrote:
and to help out Mike with making WOLips the best damn plug-in it
can be.
s/Mike/Ulrich, Anjo, Mike, et al/ ...
So
On Aug 15, 2006, at 9:07 AM, Mike Schrag wrote:
and to help out Mike with making WOLips the best damn plug-in it
can be.
s/Mike/Ulrich, Anjo, Mike, et al/ ...
Sorry Mike it seems to be one of the Laws of Nature that whoever
is doing the most posting about something is the one who owns
On Aug 15, 2006, at 10:56 AM, Pierce T. Wetter III wrote:
Show me the code!
If code/docs come, the rest will follow. So contribute your code
first, worry about what we'll name the website later.
To expand on this point... Building an association with a goal of
promoting a proprietary
and to help out Mike with making WOLips the best damn plug-in it
can be.
s/Mike/Ulrich, Anjo, Mike, et al/ ...
ms
___
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com)
Help/
with making WOLips the best damn plug-in it can be. Then take stock of how we are doing and add a few more things from Pascal's list, and so on.If you still want to go for the Foundation right away, I will help out as long as the feeling of deja vu is not too strong. :)janineOn Aug 14, 20
On Aug 15, 2006, at 6:34 AM, Pascal Robert wrote:
I fully agreee with you Janine, we should start with "marketing"
site first, and build out the Foundation in the background.
Creating it and finding the board could take a lot of time and some
politics ;-)
First a joke:
If open sourc
of how we are doing and add a few more things from Pascal's
list, and so on.
If you still want to go for the Foundation right away, I will help out
as long as the feeling of deja vu is not too strong. :)
janine
On Aug 14, 2006, at 10:44 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
Ok, let's start talking abou
Hello,
Great. I'm just adding my WO bookmark list to use to below..
- create some hype by going to conferences like O'Reilly's Web 2.0
so that we can show that WO is actually cool, but also better and
more mature than solutions like PHP and Ruby On Rails
In addition to conferences (updated)
nd others in Swing tables for Java client.
I'd be happy to contribute, starting with a reasonable membership fee.
Regards
Thomas
On 15/08/2006, at 15:44, Pascal Robert wrote:
Ok, let's start talking about a WebObjects Foundation (or
Alliance, or whatever).
Why do we need such
not too strong. :)
janine
On Aug 14, 2006, at 10:44 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
Ok, let's start talking about a WebObjects Foundation (or Alliance,
or whatever).
Why do we need such a thing ?
The Foundation will be responsible to market WO, collecting money
to help speed up the devel
y to contribute, starting with a reasonable membership fee.
Regards
Thomas
On 15/08/2006, at 15:44, Pascal Robert wrote:
Ok, let's start talking about a WebObjects Foundation (or Alliance,
or whatever).
Why do we need such a thing ?
The Foundation will be responsible to market WO, collecting m
Sounds great, count me in.
On Aug 14, 2006, at 10:44 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
Ok, let's start talking about a WebObjects Foundation (or Alliance,
or whatever).
Why do we need such a thing ?
The Foundation will be responsible to market WO, collecting money
to help speed u
Ok, let's start talking about a WebObjects Foundation (or Alliance,
or whatever).
Why do we need such a thing ?
The Foundation will be responsible to market WO, collecting money to
help speed up the development of open source tools (Entity Modeler,
etc.) and to have an unified voi
98 matches
Mail list logo
