Craig L Russell wrote: > > On Aug 13, 2006, at 7:05 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: > >> As the champion for JINI, I suppose it behooves me to try and get this >> untangled. >> >> I'm not a Jini expert, but my understanding is that it is it's own spec >> ecosystem. Therefore, I'm against having one project doing software >> implementation that is called "Jini", just as I'd be against projects >> like "Apache JCP", "Apache W3C", "Apache OASIS", "Apache ECMA" etc. > > As I understand it, Jini is not equivalent to JCP or any of the other > orgs you name here. It's an org with a tighter focus. > > That said, it appears that it is the intent of the Jini community to > have multiple implementations of the spec. [1]
Yes - it's not a perfect analogy. > >> >> However, we do have a chance here to host the governance and spec >> process for JINI. > > And I'd say that this purpose is very much in line with what we did with > JDO. The project has both the spec and tck but not an implementation. IIRC, Sun is the spec lead. Apache isn't. >> >> Therefore, I'd like to propose that we create two podlings, one for JINI >> governance, and one for building the implementation and community around >> the working code that has been proposed. > > And if the "spec podling" focused on the spec and compliance test > aspects (the org.jini stuff), and the "impl podling" focused on the > implementation aspects (the com.sun.jini stuff), I think it would be a > lot cleaner. Exactly. > > It would appear then that the "Apache Jini" podling would be the former, > and the "to be named" podling the latter. Fortunately, the incubator > should be warmed up for a naming discussion. <chortle> I'd suggest we let the proposers give the name a shot first... geir --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
