Jason Warner wrote:
Vamsi, I think that falls right in line with what I was saying in the
other thread. Take a look and see if you agree.
~Jason Warner
Which I think falls right in line with what I said earlier in this
thread too. :-)
Joe
On Feb 11, 2008 1:40 PM, Vamsavardhana Reddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
I am indifferent to whether someone is repackaging Geronimo or
providing a plugin on top of Geronimo. All I want to know is if
something is running on Geronimo (or a derivative) in production.
++Vamsi
On Feb 11, 2008 9:44 PM, Kevan Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
On Feb 8, 2008, at 12:40 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
Along the same lines as the other discussion topic on adding a
"Ready for Geronimo" page under the Community section of our
website...
How about we create a "Powered by Geronimo" page that would
help recognize the projects that provide a Geronimo based
bundle (like Liferay) and companies that provide applications
or servers based on Geronimo (like Intalio and IBM.)
A sample can be found on our wiki at -
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxSITE/Powered+by+Geronimo
Thoughts?
I'm willing to listen to contrary opinions, but I'd be against
this. This seems to be listing sources for Geronimo support. As
defined, we'd be willing to list companies that rebundle (and
support) Geronimo, but not companies that support Geronimo
directly. We could fix this by redefine "Powered by" to include
those companies, also.
I'd prefer to leave the whole issue untouched...
--kevan
