FYI, to date the discussion I opened on jcp-open to try to understand
people's experiences re developing reference impls in an environment that
fosters innovation is sadly inconclusive. There are 2 respondents to date,
one with a strong opinion that there is no conflict, and one proposing that
there is a significant conflict.
Kelvin.
On 19/02/2008, kelvin goodson <kelvin@thegoodsons.org.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 19/02/2008, Simon Nash <nash@apache.org> wrote:
> <snip/>
>
> >
> > One topic from the tuscany-user discussion that's worth exposing here
> > is whether the NNY project would be a "pure RI" with no extensions
> > beyond the spec, or a vehicle for innovation to extend the specs, as
> > both Tuscany SCA and SDO have been. My view is that it will need to
> > be at least some of the latter in order to build a sustainable
> > community of developers and users.
>
>
> +1
>
> This will create some challenges
> > given that one of the goals of the NNY project is to deliver the
> > official JCP RI.
> >
> > Simon
>
> <snip/>
>
> I just asked a question on the jcp-open mailing list to find out how other
> projects that do RIs in Apache handle the apparent contention. It should
> appear under a February 2008 heading in the mailing list archive at [1]
> shortly.
>
> Kelvin.
>
> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-jcp-open/
|