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 On Feb 11, 2008 1:40 PM, Vamsavardhana Reddy <[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]> 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 > > > >
