Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 45043 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2007 14:17:04 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Jun 2007 14:17:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 79692 invoked by uid 500); 7 Jun 2007 14:17:03 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 79641 invoked by uid 500); 7 Jun 2007 14:17:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 79629 invoked by uid 99); 7 Jun 2007 14:17:03 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 Jun 2007 07:17:03 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [72.22.94.67] (HELO virtual.halosg.com) (72.22.94.67) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 Jun 2007 07:16:58 -0700 Received: (qmail 5593 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2007 09:13:15 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.2.2?) (195.216.52.112) by halosg.com with SMTP; 7 Jun 2007 09:13:15 -0500 Message-ID: <4668131E.1060608@hanik.com> Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 16:15:58 +0200 From: Filip Hanik - Dev Lists User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (Windows/20070509) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Re: Bayeux implementation References: <46680332.80507@hanik.com> <466807E9.6060104@apache.org> In-Reply-To: <466807E9.6060104@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Remy Maucherat wrote: > Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote: >> yo, >> I was gonna create a Bayeux implementation for Tomcat, >> I am thinking it might be good for us to work with the Jetty and >> Glassfish folks to use the same org.dojox interfaces. > > I don't like dependencies ;) I am not interested in working with these > two projects, which had relationships with Tomcat in the past, but > chose to end them. not working with the projects is your personal prerogative, the rest of the community might not be against it. I am not and one more post thought it was a good idea. I think the relationships especially around bayeux can be very beneficial for all of us, as we can be part of it dictating the direction of it instead of just having to respond to it due to user demand. I'd like to know if anyone else is strongly against it, since I don't think past events should dictate if we join this initiative or not. >> Question: Where should I do this, sandbox or trunk? > > Sandbox, I think. Sandbox it is. > >> Why Bayeux? Cause there is a good client support through the Dojo >> toolkit. > > I was wondering if it was a standard, so I guess client support is a > benefit. However, the spec itself looks bad at the moment (unless I > missed something). If the spec is bad, then its another reason for us to join in, but the fact that there is a client support, speaks for itself. Comet is very popular but the skillset to create a client that works in a browser is hard to find. This was very much the feedback we got during Apachecon EU in Amsterdam. Whether we use it or not, we can decide on later. In the meantime I'll touch base with the folks and get the ball rolling. Filip --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org