On 3/16/06, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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?
The point is, its a cross project thing; getting together folks from ActiveMQ, OpenEJB, WADI and Geronimo; so these kinds of code consolidation discussions are probably best on Geronimo. e.g. there's no point talking about OpenEJB on ActiveMQ's 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, OpenEJB still isn't here yet; I'm not sure if the incuabtion of WADI is quite ready either. > and what would the Geronimo list have to do with > discussion on these incubator project lists? Its more we've got some cross-project consolidation thats needed. e.g. see the distributed session state discussions on geronimo; which affect Jetty, Tomcat, WADI, OpenEJB, ServiceMix. IO is a similar cross cutting concern. > > > 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? Yes; slip of the tongue :) Its more that the Geronimo list is the best place to have these wide-ranging cross-project discussions; given that we're all faced with similar concerns and all ultimately integrate into the same container. > > 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. Agreed. > The discussions that started at ApacheCon do not seem to have transited to > our mailing lists, e.g., activemq-dev or mina-dev. As I said; once all the code is at apache, we can discuss at length on Geronimo lists, where folks from WADI, OpenEBJ, Jetty, Tomcat, ActiveMQ & ServiceMix hang out; we should invite the MINA folks to the party too - then lets see where it goes from there. -- James ------- http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
