geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sachin Patel <>
Subject Re: Geronimo 2.0 Milestone's and how were doing
Date Tue, 05 Dec 2006 18:40:32 GMT
This sounds reasonable and achievable to me.  A milestone JEE 5  
driver would be a great way to close out the year and get some  
momentum built up for next.

I started to work on G-1526 last week and will hopefully like to get  
this in for the milestone.  I've got the server building with using  
the DeployableModule interface as a replacement for JarFile, and now  
I'm trying to tweak the interface and try to test out the Eclipse  
support for it.  If it works I'd like to post the patch for review  
and get it in for M1.

On Dec 4, 2006, at 10:54 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:

> While ripping out drywall this weekend I was thinking about our  
> Geronimo 2.0 and all the work that needs to get done to complete  
> this monsterous effort.   While sifting through the scorecard and  
> thinking about all the different things that need to be addressed  
> it became a bit overwhelming.  As everyone knows many different  
> projects are working on their implementations of Java EE 5.0.  Some  
> are available and others are works in progress (as is ours).  It  
> seems that from user perspective people are really interested in  
> the Java EE and have been asking for several months about where we  
> are.  At this point it would be nice to give them an idea of what  
> we're thinking about.
> I had previously put out a set of milestones and dates.  I wanted  
> to make it a little more formal and of course with all the caveats  
> that this is open source and our timetables are subject to people's  
> time and contribution.
> With that, here is an updated timeline and some graphic  
> representations that represent the Java EE specifications that need  
> to be completed from a high level.
> I think it was Dain that used the term table stakes when referring  
> to the specification.  Meaning that we need the spec related  
> functionality to get in the game but innovations beyond the  
> specification were necessary to make a bigger splash.  I don't  
> capture those here but I'll work on pulling that together as well.
> Take a look at and  
> provide your thoughts on how were doing.
> If we are going to make a Dec 22 Beta 1 then we would have to cut  
> sometime in the next week and a half.
> What do y'all think?
> Matt Hogstrom


View raw message