Sam Ruby wrote:
Martin van den Bemt wrote:
How do you fit in / are going to fit in with
http://www.eclipse.org/proposals/atf/ ?
Zimbra is mentioned there.
If you look closely, that proposal closely matches the diffs between the
first draft and second draft of the AJAX Toolkit Proposal th
Martin van den Bemt wrote:
How do you fit in / are going to fit in with
http://www.eclipse.org/proposals/atf/ ?
Zimbra is mentioned there.
If you look closely, that proposal closely matches the diffs between the
first draft and second draft of the AJAX Toolkit Proposal that was
presented her
How do you fit in / are going to fit in with
http://www.eclipse.org/proposals/atf/ ?
Zimbra is mentioned there.
Mvgr,
Martin
Andrew Clark wrote:
I have made a few modifications to the Ajax proposal
Wiki page[1] in an attempt to resolve a few of the
issues people have raised. The changes includ
Could you please just restart the vote?
AND, given the chatter and discussion, could you post the final proposal
to the mail list again for a vote? I'm not trying to slow this down,
but after all the muss and fuss, 3 more days won't kill it, and it will
be clearer (at least to me...) to have
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 10:59:57AM -0500, Sam Ruby wrote:
> When I originally kicked off this vote, I specified today, midnight, as
> the 72-hour-and-then-some deadline. Since then the proposal got a
> substantial revision (in particular, a new name) on Tuesday afternoon,
> so extending this a
When I originally kicked off this vote, I specified today, midnight, as
the 72-hour-and-then-some deadline. Since then the proposal got a
substantial revision (in particular, a new name) on Tuesday afternoon,
so extending this a few hours to 4PM PST seems in order.
I believe that the current
Upayavira wrote:
> Another concern IIRC was download size. I remember
> (possibly incorrectly) that the toolkit has quite a
> large download before it will work, while other
> toolkits download piecemeal as required.
That's certainly one approach. And there are good reasons
for doing it all to
Just a couple comments on Zimbra's motivations :-)
Zimbra has absolutely no commercial interest or monetization goals around its
Ajax toolkit. We are a collaboration software company and not a software tools
company. We do have a very strong interest in ensuring the success of Ajax in a
*non-pr
Andrew Clark wrote:
> Martin Marinschek wrote:
>
>>can you just shortly reply to the technical questions
>>Martin Cooper has raised on this list? I do think he
>>has a valid point there, and I'd like to hear what you
>>have to say to that.
>
>
> I went back to the archives and re-read all of
For me, the first approach suffices.
regards,
Martin
On 1/18/06, Andrew Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Martin Marinschek wrote:
> > I don't recall anymore what he said specifically - did
> > he talk about namespacing? do you do that?
>
> I was unable to find anything specific to comment on.
Martin Marinschek wrote:
> I don't recall anymore what he said specifically - did
> he talk about namespacing? do you do that?
I was unable to find anything specific to comment on.
Most of Martin Cooper's comments in his posts were
about the technology being too immature and that he
felt (after l
I don't recall anymore what he said specifically - did he talk about
namespacing?
do you do that?
regards,
Martin
On 1/18/06, Andrew Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Martin Marinschek wrote:
> > can you just shortly reply to the technical questions
> > Martin Cooper has raised on this list? I
Martin Marinschek wrote:
> can you just shortly reply to the technical questions
> Martin Cooper has raised on this list? I do think he
> has a valid point there, and I'd like to hear what you
> have to say to that.
I went back to the archives and re-read all of Martin's
posts on this topic but
Andrew,
can you just shortly reply to the technical questions Martin Cooper
has raised on this list? I do think he has a valid point there, and
I'd like to hear what you have to say to that.
Plus, please add me in as a committer. If this is to be incubated, I'd
rather than not be part of it to be
On Jan 17, 2006, at 6:13 PM, Andrew Clark wrote:
[1] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/KabukiProposal
To be clear: +1
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have made a few modifications to the Ajax proposal
Wiki page[1] in an attempt to resolve a few of the
issues people have raised. The changes include:
* Changed name to "Kabuki"
* Added text to clarify the scope of the project
Please let me know if there are any other issues that
should be addre
16 matches
Mail list logo
