Mailing-List: contact cxf-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of debbiemoynihan@gmail.com
 designates 66.249.92.169 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=ih0bi5BIa4pFW9V+ihiLa8i04emufJO1NHEg6lhBLLelyYSkF05+c7lJaY6Yr1+ng+1fLbXoEbGEORJkmnt862meRSb3YdujlCPUGW++joNLRRNYPR9eNyhezaIAfHm27RM6HdKsq5Okazh9vyF2uppqkrUmKwpNmePj0LW+aZM=
Message-ID: <3a81bc910609011331m70f4801clf980c6ded3d629c0@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 16:31:19 -0400
From: "Debbie Moynihan" <debbiemoynihan@gmail.com>
To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Celtix and Xfire future support and maintenance
In-Reply-To: <7F083571-2034-42B8-B07F-76246EAD3B05@jaguNET.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_107098_21272398.1157142679694"
References: <44F6B5C2.4070006@iona.com> <44F84614.8050403@envoisolutions.com>
	 <7F083571-2034-42B8-B07F-76246EAD3B05@jaguNET.com>

------=_Part_107098_21272398.1157142679694
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Just to be clear would it be acceptable for the  maintenance releases of
Celtix to be developed and made available at ObjectWeb rather than Apache -
assuming we make it clear that the project is being discontinued on the
project site at ObjectWeb?

On 9/1/06, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:
>
> It's expected, I think, that the separate releases of Celtix and XFire
> will be reduced to maint. only at present, but to make it clear
> that the projects are being discontinued.
>
> On Sep 1, 2006, at 10:39 AM, Dan Diephouse wrote:
>
> > Why not just continue using ObjectWeb for the 1.x release of
> > Celtix? You're going to have a much harder time trying to do
> > releases here as you'll need to get all the licensing requirements
> > met and it will probably end up being a distraction from the
> > project. This is what XFire is doing. Additionally I don't really
> > see what in the proposal you're referring to. The proposal was for
> > the XFire/Celtix merge. I think we'll run into issues in the
> > incubator if we did a release of just XFire or just Celtix. I
> > believe we even told them on the incubator list that we'd keep
> > doing maintenance releases at their original homes.
> >
> > - Dan
> >
> > Bozhong Lin wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> One topic discussed during CeltiXfire proposal is about Celtix and
> >> Xfire maintenance after they are merged and move to Apache
> >> community. Currently, we are considering to do further Celtix bug
> >> fixes and maintenance releases out of Apache community, thus to
> >> help existing Celtix users gradually adapt to Apache community. In
> >> order to do so, we have a couple issues to be resolved:
> >> 1. A branch for Celtix latest code in Objectweb. Right now, there
> >> is a tag for latest code from Objectweb, we need to create a
> >> branch for this tag, thus allowing bug fixes for Celtix to be
> >> committed into this branch.
> >> 2. Publishing snapshots for Celtix maintenance releases. We
> >> obviously need ability to publish Celtix snapshots if we are going
> >> to do maintenance out of Apache community. What is Apache policy
> >> related to publish snapshots under this situation.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Bo
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dan Diephouse
> > (616) 971-2053
> > Envoi Solutions LLC
> > http://netzooid.com
> >
>
>

------=_Part_107098_21272398.1157142679694--