Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> James Strachan wrote:
> > Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> > > I know for a fact that WADI, ActiveIO and Trifork guys have
> > > been talking about coming up with a single framework for IO.
> > > James hinted in a prev message and there have been some
> > > references in emails on [EMAIL PROTECTED] list[1] and no traffic on
> > > activemq list (as far as i can tell)
> >
> > Thats kinda the point - as up to now most of this code has not
> > been part of Geronimo and so wouldn't have been discussed on the
> > Geronimo lists.
But what about on the ActiveMQ list?
> > Once all the code has made it to the incubator, then we can start
> > discussing this on the Geronimo list
What code is remaining, and what would the Geronimo list have to do with
discussion on these incubator project lists?
> > there's lots of things we could do to consodiate code within the
> > Geronimo family of projects - once they are all at Geronimo.
You mean the ASF family of projects, and once they are all at the ASF?
> I tried to facilitate discussions between the various ASF java
> projects. There were some interesting ad hoc discussions w/
> Geronimo, Trifork, WADI, ActiveIO, and Directory people.
Yes, ActiveIO and MINA appear to have overlap that could consolidate, and
there seemed to be some sense amongst participants that a best of breed
could come from both, where each had something to contribute that improved
on the other. Not a drop-in fit, but potentially a very worthwhile
investigation.
The discussions that started at ApacheCon do not seem to have transited to
our mailing lists, e.g., activemq-dev or mina-dev.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
