Mailing-List: contact river-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <4CB9310F.4030708@zeus.net.au>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 14:58:55 +1000
From: Peter Firmstone <jini@zeus.net.au>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080531)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Jini Surrogate.  Was: Re: [PROPOSAL] Lookup Discovery and Join
 Kit; Sub Project
References: <4CB8E023.1030907@zeus.net.au>
	 <AANLkTim69mZTPjfVvXWMZRCAOsEsPi+BooDE-yNrW6gA@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4CB8F59B.7010100@zeus.net.au>
	 <AANLkTikAptZqu6wCPL8npt8FBxE2OfuPEdH+CyZeb6eY@mail.gmail.com>
 <1287193105.3782.11.camel@cameron>
In-Reply-To: <1287193105.3782.11.camel@cameron>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Greg,

That's excellent news! Put it in skunk/surrogate.

Cheers,

Peter.

Greg Trasuk wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 21:26, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
>   
>>> I've abandoned any ideas of continuing the Jini Surrogate Architecture
>>> implementation, since I haven't been able to satisfy the code provenance
>>> rules, despite the code being released under the Apache License 2.0 and
>>> covered by a Patent Non-Assertion Covenant.
>>>       
>> I'm completely not up to speed on this, but if legal gave you a frown,
>> I guess that's that.
>>
>>     
>
> For what it's worth, I've begun a clean-room implementation of Surrogate
> starting from the spec, although I make no promises as to how quickly it
> will proceed.  I'm curious - should I start committing with the
> in-progress code or wait til there's something approaching a working
> module?  Personally I'd prefer committing as we go, since (a) I'm much
> happier with code in version control and (b) people might be able to
> give opinions and assistance.
>
> Then, if the word is commit now, where in the tree should I put it?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Greg.
>
>