On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 21:42 +0300, Jukka Zitting wrote: > However, I'm still confused at the need to bring in a separate spec > project. The Jini proposal states the scope of the project to be the > "implementation" of the specification, and that scope is still valid > regardless of what happens with the Jini standard. And I very much > agree with the idea of choosing a different name for the > implementation project.
We seem to be agreeing that the name "Jini" commonly refers to a technology not an implementation. So if the project is about just an impl of Jini then +1 for going ahead with just Apache XYZ, where XYZ != Jini. Sanjiva. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
