There is no problem. There is no reason at all for any one project to "own" the CMS space at Apache. It makes sense for Slide to replace its back-end with Jackrabbit for one and only one reason: such an architecture will enable substitutability of its back-end and simplify Slide's implementation. If that does not turn out to be the case, then none of us would want Slide to use Jackrabbit and I see no reason to badger them into doing so. Likewise for Lenya, JCMS, and whatever else may come next.
What we would like to see is all of the folks who think they might need a JVM storage management interface to get involved in the Jackrabbit project, try to use it to build useful things, tell us all when problems are encountered (preferably right now, while the JCR specification is still easy to change), and through that interaction make Jackrabbit something more useful than just another JSR interface. That is a heck of a lot more useful than just waiting to see what code the current project developers turn out.
....Roy
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
