On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Alex Karasulu <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:27 AM, Niclas Hedhman <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Richard S. Hall <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > But I wouldn't be happy if a TLP was pursued only because >> > there is this perception that Felix subprojects are for Felix only. That >> > just perpetuates people's ignorance. >> >> This was not the reason for my suggestion, and is to me an important >> but separate issue. >> >> My reasons for suggesting a TLP; >> >> - Already seems to have more community involvement than we require. >> >> - Multiple projects at the ASF are signaling interest to build on top of >> it. >> >> - OSGi is becoming a household technology, and Felix needs to address >> the 'umbrella' concerns sooner or later. TLP would avoid adding to >> that label. >> > > Felix is in no danger of becoming a jakarta. Also if they were ready to do > a TLP they would have gone that route instead of proposing it here as a > subproject. If the future holds something else then we'll find out in > time. This is IMHO a moot point to discuss or worry about. When/if the > time is right the move will be made. For now we're just happy good things > are happening ... let's roll with that.
+1 regards, Karl > Regards, > Alex > -- Karl Pauls [email protected]
