I'm fine with the proposal. In Tuscany SCA Java, we support many
databindings such as JAXB, SDO, XmlBeans and AXIOM. IMHO, SDO is one of the
technology choices to represent data in the SOA environment. Removing SDO
from the sentence will give us more flexibility. I agree that it doesn't
stop us from implementing SDO and supporting SDO in the Tuscany project.
Thanks,
Raymond
----- Original Message -----
From: "Simon Nash" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] altering the Tuscany "Charter" in relation to SDO
Java
See inline.
Simon
kelvin goodson wrote:
There's been a discussion thread going for a while [1] in the Tuscany
community with regards to shifting the Apache home for SDO Java work to a
new project. This has been going on in parallel to the discussion on the
incubator general list on establishing a new project, originally aimed
to
be tightly scoped to JSR 235 (see [2] to jump into that thread at a
location particularly relevant for this posting).
I'd like to try to move the Tuscany side of the discussion along to some
kind of conclusion. In view of that aim, I'd like to suggest that we
take
a fresh look at the current state of the wording for the Tuscany
"charter",
if that's what it's known as, that we arrived at during the graduation
vote
[3].
I suggest ....
...establish a Project Management Committee charged with the creation
and maintenance of open-source software for distribution at no charge
to the public, that simplifies the development, deployment and
management
of distributed applications built as compositions of service components.
These components may be implemented with a range of technologies and
connected using a variety of communication protocols. This software will
implement relevant open standards including, but not limited to, the
SCA standard defined by the OASIS OpenCSA member section, and related
technologies.
The only edit here is that the current blessed version ends with ...
"but not limited to, the SCA and SDO standards defined by the OASIS
OpenCSA
member section"
I urge you to give your attention to this in the near future please;
making
this alteration would seem to be a necessary, but not sufficient,
element
for altering the proposal for the new project.
I would be OK with this change. It does not in itself imply stopping
SDO development in Tuscany, as SDO is a "related technology" of SCA.
However, it gives Tuscany more flexibility over whether it develops
SDO itself or makes use of an implementation developed elsewhere.
Simon
Kelvin.
[1]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-tuscany-user/200802.mbox/browser
[2]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200802.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
[3]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200710.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
