One more question: why not doing this as a subproject of JetSpeed ? It is an existing jakarta project, the scope matches - why creating a separate jakarta community instead of joining the existing one ?
If in a bright future Jakarta will be a single community - having pluto as a subproject of jetspeed or as a separate jakarta subproject won't make any difference - the community will be the same. IMO that would be the best approach. You could still have a separate CVS ( but hopefully share the mailing list with jetspeed ). BTW - my understanding is that the spec lead ( or the expert group ) can choose to use an open mailing list - I know at least 2 JSRs that do that. I think it would be a good policy for apache to favor JSRs that choose open lists, and avoid closed JSRs. Costin Stefan Hepper wrote: > Hi, > here some answers to questions asked in this thread: > > - Apache was one of the first memebers in the JSR 168 Expert Group and > IBM asked Apache explicitly for their support before submitting this > JSR. Currently the Apache resprentative in the Expert Group is David > Sean Taylor from the JetSpeed group. > > - The submitteed JSR states that the RI is planned to do at Apache, so > no surprise > > - There is already code, but as some of you noted at the moment the spec > and API is still confidential and therefore nothing is public available. > As the proposal states the Expert Group plans to make a spec draft and > API draft available around March. As soon as this is done we can check > in the code. > > - Everyone that wants to help is more than welcome to join > > Regards, > Stefan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
