incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bob Scheifler <Bob.Scheif...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Jini : Separate Governance and Implementation Projects
Date Tue, 15 Aug 2006 17:09:57 GMT
Jukka Zitting wrote:
> I think the question boils down to the issue of what will happen to
> the Jini standard now that the JDP has been closed down.

I hope I'm not nitpicking, but there isn't a singular Jini standard;
there are multiple specifications that have been approved as standards
under the JDP.  (Jini doesn't have an umbrella "platform" specification.)

> It's correct
> to insist in that the standard shouldn't be developed within the
> implementation project if the goal is to allow independent
> implementations.

I don't know that it will matter in the end, but I disagree.
It's important to note that the JDP is not a process for
*developing* standards, but for *approving* them.  The JDP is
a backend decision process, not a frontend development process.
Most of the specifications that have been approved under the JDP
were in fact developed within the same project that did the
initial (and in many cases, still the only) implementation.

> Thus, there are two options:
> 1) It is decided (by what community?) that there is no need for
> independent implementations, in which case bringing in the project
> with both the implementation and the specifications under the name of
> "Apache Jini" would make sense.
> 2) Independent implementations remains a goal for the Jini standard,
> and a suitably independent body (be it an Apache project, a real
> standardization organization, or whatever) is chartered for the
> maintenance and development of the standard. In this case we bring in
> the JTSK (+ related tools) implementation as an "Apache Something"
> project that focuses on the implementation of the externally defined
> standard.

I can't tell if your #1 implies that the notion of Jini standards
disappears.  I don't see a problem with an outcome in which the
notion of Jini "standards" disappears, but the ASF project continues
to maintain and develop APIs that others could also produce
implementations of, as well as the ASF project producing implementations
of those APIs.  Which I think is a different outcome than either of
your two options?

- Bob

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message