Is anyone giving any thought to supporting SECIOP under Yoko? It is relevant to this discussion, I think, since you might need replaceability at a different layer than at the socket layer.
Thanks, Fred On Apr 22, 2006, at 4:40 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: Agreed. There's no reason to postpone our work to involve the JCP for something that, on a good day, only 3 people on the planet care about. Regards, Alan Dain Sundstrom wrote: If we can get an agreement here and implement it as the defacto standard, I think we will all be better off. -dain On Apr 19, 2006, at 2:56 AM, Andy Piper wrote: At 10:18 AM 4/14/2006, Maybe we can get IONA and IBM to agree here :) I can attempt to push it through IBM (and maybe Andy can try BEA). My personal opinion is that this should go through the JCP. The reason the original proposal failed was because it was defined in IDL in order to be supportable on any ORB (i.e. non-Java) and there were issues with the way this worked. I think this is really a Java specific problem and therefore should be solved in a java-specific way. Unfortunately I think protocol dictates that this go through the OMG .... Another alternative is to sneak it in via the Java-IDL spec which already has Java-specific APIs. I suspect this would also be a breach of protocol :( andy _______________________________________________________________________ Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
