On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 4:22 PM, Senaka Fernando <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 9:24 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 4:20 PM, Michael Champion
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I'd also point out that there are free SDKs an
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 9:24 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 4:20 PM, Michael Champion
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'd also point out that there are free SDKs and Express versions of most
> of the Microsoft development tools [1], targeted at non
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 4:20 PM, Michael Champion
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd also point out that there are free SDKs and Express versions of most of
> the Microsoft development tools [1], targeted at non-commercial developers.
> See [2] for a neutral discussion of what has been left out o
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
4. running continuous integration on shore may require licenses. it's
important that contributors understand this and don't just start
diving in. it may be better to start off shore.
As a US based Deleware 501(c)3 that wouldn't protect u
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
> 4. running continuous integration on shore may require licenses. it's
> important that contributors understand this and don't just start
> diving in. it may be better to start off shore.
As a US based Deleware 501(c)3 that wouldn't protect us.
As far as continuou
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> ...The full proposal is here:
>> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/StonehengeProposal..
>
> That says "future contributions could depend on proprietary systems
> such as Microsoft .Net or c
EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 7:15 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Stonehenge
> 3. payment for development tools to contribute to the project may
> prove a barrier to new contributions. apache has always used open
> source build and test tool
Robert
Excellent points:
>>> ...The full proposal is here:
>>> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/StonehengeProposal..
>>
>> That says "future contributions could depend on proprietary systems
>> such as Microsoft .Net or commercial JEE servers", which IIUC means
>> that some parts of Stonehenge mi
On 11/12/08, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> ...The full proposal is here:
>> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/StonehengeProposal..
>
> That says "future contributions could depend on proprietary systems
+1
-Original Message-
From: Paul Fremantle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 12:22 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Stonehenge
Bertrand
Great feedback. I think we should keep a clear statement in the SVN
and distros that identifies
Bertrand
Great feedback. I think we should keep a clear statement in the SVN
and distros that identifies which parts of the project use which
dependencies. I also think we should structure the build so that each
different framework implementation of each application is a separate
build target. We
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...The full proposal is here:
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/StonehengeProposal..
That says "future contributions could depend on proprietary systems
such as Microsoft .Net or commercial JEE servers", which IIUC mean
Microsoft is happy to support Stonehenge. We believe that the intent of the
project is to focus on building a set of sample applications based on approved
W3C and OASIS standard protocols with a goal of helping increase
interoperability between different implementations on various platforms. We
+1 and I have added my self to the committers
Thanks,
Ruwan
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 10:04 PM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to propose Stonehenge as an incubator proposal.
>
> Stonehenge is a set of example applications for Service Oriented
>
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 4:34 PM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to propose Stonehenge as an incubator proposal.
>
> Stonehenge is a set of example applications for Service Oriented
> Architecture that spans languages and platforms and demonstra
+1 for the proposal
Azeez
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 10:04 PM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to propose Stonehenge as an incubator proposal.
>
> Stonehenge is a set of example applications for Service Oriented
> Architecture that spans languages and pla
> Looks good to me. I've added myself to the list of mentors :)
Thanks!!
Paul
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 8:34 AM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to propose Stonehenge as an incubator proposal.
>
> Stonehenge is a set of example applications for Service Oriented
> Architecture that spans languages and platforms and demonstra
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 11:46 AM, Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Upon thinking about it, and talking with others, I really believe
> that Stonehenge had the potential of being an extremely cool
> effort. Not only for the code aspects, but even more importantly
> the impact it could have
d in this
> proposal.
>
> Thanks
> Paul
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 4:34 PM
> Subject: [PROPOSAL] Stonehenge
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>
>
> I'd like to p
On Nov 4, 2008, at 11:34 AM, Paul Fremantle wrote:
I'd like to propose Stonehenge as an incubator proposal.
Stonehenge is a set of example applications for Service Oriented
Architecture that spans languages and platforms and demonstrates best
practise and interoperability.
The full pro
Paul Fremantle wrote:
the scope's really pretty broad so i think a little more detail about
scaling out would be useful: how would stonehenge approach adding new
suites especially when donated from outside the developers group?
I guess I imagined that there would be two approaches. One is that
Robert
> sounds like a worthwhile initiative
Thanks for the feedback!
> i like the idea but i do wonder a little whether the practical scope
> of the project needs some more rounding out
I agree it would make sense to help tie down what would make this a
successful project, release, etc.
Any tho
+1, this seems to be interesting
Thanks,
Ruwan
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 10:04 PM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to propose Stonehenge as an incubator proposal.
>
> Stonehenge is a set of example applications for Service Oriented
> Architecture t
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 4:34 PM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to propose Stonehenge as an incubator proposal.
>
> Stonehenge is a set of example applications for Service Oriented
> Architecture that spans languages and platforms and demonstra
I'd like to propose Stonehenge as an incubator proposal.
Stonehenge is a set of example applications for Service Oriented
Architecture that spans languages and platforms and demonstrates best
practise and interoperability.
The full proposal is here: http://wiki.apache.org/incu
26 matches
Mail list logo
