Hi Bob, On Aug 14, 2006, at 8:17 AM, Bob Scheifler wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:However, we do have a chance here to host the governance and spec process for JINI.Therefore, I'd like to propose that we create two podlings, one for JINI governance, and one for building the implementation and community aroundthe working code that has been proposed.I'm extremely reluctant to start out with two podlings.I'm not sure what "governance" you have in mind beyond the spec process,but I don't believe we have sufficient commitments from people to keep an equivalent of the existing Jini community standards process going forward. I think our best shot at success is a single podling, which maintains both specs and code under a single development process. (And as such, the specs would no longer be "standards".)
This is an interesting turn. The Jini web site doesn't currently say anything like this. It talks about "the specification" and "the implementation" as separable pieces.
If the desire is to abandon the notion of a standard specification and work on Jini as an implementation (the "standard" being whatever the implementation ends up doing) then I agree that one podling should be sufficient.
I wonder if others in the Jini community have this same objective? Would it make sense to update the jini.org web site once consensus is achieved?
This is a pretty important step, probably equally important as your decision to use the Apache License for Jini. I don't want to impose any arbitrary barriers to acceptance into the Apache incubator, but I'd like to see a wider discussion of abandoning the "standard".
Craig [1] http://www.jini.org/wiki/Category:Introduction_to_Jini
- Bob --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Craig Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://db.apache.org/jdo
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
