I think he is talking about having/needing a separate download for ServiceMix irrespective of whether an incubating jar is in Geronimo or not.
Basically if one needs servicemix, they get a whole package that has incubating all over it. Same with derby, if someone needed derby they won't download Geronimo. They will download Derby. Does not mean that derby jar should not be in Geronimo. It could be, but needs to be marked properly (incubating sth or other in the jar name) Anyway that is my understanding... [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-servicemix-dev/200602.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 3/16/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/16/06, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I don't think there is such a restriction. Where did you come across > > that? in other words, who said that? > > > > "we are apparently not allowed to use the incubating ActiveMQ" > > > See this thread... > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-servicemix-dev/200602.mbox/[EMAIL > PROTECTED] > > I confess that this was a suprise - I'd like clarification if this is > actually really the case. It seems silly for the incubation process to > actually stop other Apache projects using the code. > > e.g. I remember us using Apache Derby for a very long time during its > incubation on Geronimo - which resulted in some Geronimo folks contributing > back to Derby; we also considered its releases to be real things we built > software from, not just "milestones". Though I guess back then, Geronimo was > still in incubation itself which is why it was maybe allowed to use > incubating code? > > -- > > James > ------- > http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/ > > -- Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
