incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Filip at Apache <>
Subject Re: Jini : Separate Governance and Implementation Projects
Date Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:12:02 GMT
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 17:36 -0400, Jim Hurley wrote:
>> I'm not going to try and pull a Bill Clinton with "it depends what the
>> definition of "is" is".... but I'd answer that I believe the Jini  
>> Community
>> views the project as *the* Jini implementation.
>> But *the* as in:  "the main", "the original", "the most prominent",  
>> (what will be)
>>   "the Community's implementation", and "the one you'd recommend a  
>> developer
>> go grab to get going with Jini". But not *the* as in "the only".
> If the resulting code is in org.jini.* then I have no problem with this.
> However, the current structure appears to be org.jini.* for APIs and
> com.sun.something.* for implementation. Clearly that structure says
> there can be multiple implementations - and in that case I'm against
> putting the two parts together.
doesn't make sense, let me give you two examples, the latter being 
extremely obvious
1. in Tomcat we have javax.servlet.*, org.apache.catalina.*, 
org.apache.coyote.*, org.apache.jasper.*, javax.mail.*, javax.annotation.*
2. Harmony, are we saying that harmony couldn't implement 
java.lang.String and org.apache.harmony.strings.StringImpl?

Clearly harmony is a project for both spec and implementation, and yes, 
there are more than one implementation available, but that doesn't mean 
harmony doesn't create their own java.* library.


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

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

View raw message