Excellent -- good to see that there's general support for this. So far, I count:
+1: 4 binding, 3 non-binding and no other votes. I don't expect to start on any of this until the weekend -- if there are any other opinions, there are a few days left to squawk. :) Eddie On 5/23/06, Steve Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1 On 5/23/06, Carlin Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > +1 > > On 5/23/06, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > Daryl Olander wrote: > > > +1 > > > > > > On 5/23/06, Thomas Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > > >> Sounds like a good move. I'm for it. > > >> > > >> On 5/23/06, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > Awesome! +1 from me. We could then use/ship WSM jars as part of > Axis2 > > >> > for JSR 181 support (with some additional glue code on the Axis2 > > >> > side). > > >> > > > >> > -- dims > > >> > > > >> > On 5/23/06, Eddie O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > > All-- > > >> > > > > >> > > I'd like to propose that the WSM sub-directory in beehive/trunk > > be > > >> > > converted into a sub-project of Beehive. This makes it > > >> significantly > > >> > > easier to ship WSM independently of the rest of Beehive as it > > >> would be > > >> > > self-contained and wrapped in its own packaging. > > >> > > > > >> > > The motivation for this is a desire to make Beehive less > > >> monolithic > > >> > > in structure so that separable parts like WSM can evolve without > > >> being > > >> > > tied to the other pieces and to deliver on the obvious interest > in > > >> > > JSR-181 in this TSS thread: > > >> > > > > >> > > http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=40280 > > >> > > > > >> > > The next step would be to release a real beta of WSM before the > TCK > > >> work starts. > > >> > > > > >> > > Thoughts / comments / flames? > > >> > > > > >> > > Eddie > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/ > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
