Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-river-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 31199 invoked from network); 5 Oct 2010 09:33:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 5 Oct 2010 09:33:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 32545 invoked by uid 500); 5 Oct 2010 09:33:09 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-river-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 32395 invoked by uid 500); 5 Oct 2010 09:33:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact river-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list river-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 32387 invoked by uid 99); 5 Oct 2010 09:33:06 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 09:33:06 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.163.196.105] (HELO nyx.xs4all.nl) (83.163.196.105) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 09:32:57 +0000 Received: from macmini.qcg.lan ([192.168.99.5]) by nyx.xs4all.nl with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P33sx-0004xc-Kt for river-dev@incubator.apache.org; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:32:35 +0200 Message-ID: <4CAAF0B3.3000508@qcg.nl> Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:32:35 +0200 From: Sim IJskes - QCG Organization: Quality Consultancy Group b.v. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100713 Thunderbird/3.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Towards Internet Jini Services (trust) References: <4C9DB5BF.8090307@zeus.net.au> <201010011500.49853.michal.kleczek@xpro.biz> <4CA9AE5B.7050208@qcg.nl> <201010041342.46272.michal.kleczek@xpro.biz> <4CA9C2B9.3060005@qcg.nl> <0B443A75-60BB-4313-A779-9731E2D22374@topiatechnology.com> In-Reply-To: <0B443A75-60BB-4313-A779-9731E2D22374@topiatechnology.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 10/04/2010 05:49 PM, Mike McGrady wrote: > I think that we need to decide what the requirements are? Anyone else thinking this? NSA has a tee shirt saying, "We trust in trust". Defining requirements is good. But an excercise determining if jini is ready for the internet is also good. This excercise can consist of discussion of pros and cons of keeping the existing code, or adding code to it. By having arguments and counter arguments we can build an (collective) instinctive feeling for the strength and weaknesses of jini. I'm sure the original jini team had similar discussions, maybe not over email, but more around a beer, or at the coffee machine. We need to rebuild this team coherence. Gr. Sim BTW: i also do trust trust, and even i trust trust is trust.