Harmeet Bedi wrote:
Harmeet:----- Original Message ----- From: "Aaron Knauf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... we will need to agree on the correct way to establish this dependency. Two things seem obvious to me here: 1. We don't want to depend on the whole tomcat project just to get the Naming stuff.It may be a good idea to get on naming/tomcat mailing list push them to do stable releases. If they realize other projects depends on it, they should be happy do a snapshot build for the naming libraries. Working against CVS seems like a moving target.2. We don't want to get stuck in an obsolescent rut, as we are with our stone age Avalon release.Avalon release have been mostly driven by Avalon developers and James folks have just gone along. I really don't think there has been a strong need to upgrade. If there pain there(although to me it seems moderate to low) maybe James should just be more James oriented on when and how we upgrade naming libraries.
I think the question of "James synchronization" is bigger than the point concerning naming. If Aaron puts time and effort into a new service - he has to take into consideration the constrains implied by the James "obsolescent rut". If you developing new components to work with James this can be a real issue (read "obstacle to James adoption"). Over in Avalon there is process to bring out releases of everything that James is theoretically dependent on. At the same time it would be a lot more helpful to the process in James were in sync. While I understand that this is not on the James short list of priorities - the lack of synchronization has a real detrimental impact. As long as James remains out of sync., James remains out-of-scope for many potential users.
There are two ways to bring James in sync.
(a) via collaboration - i.e. updated James CVS HEAD and validate current
candidates - so you know what's happening, and the Avalon guys will
knows what's happening
(b) wait for formal releases then you guys do the work of bringing
yourself up-to-date - and if there is a problem with any of the
release content, then - yes - Avalon will sort the issue
One of these approaches is about "partnership" and one is about being a "user". Personally I prefer the the "partnership" approach. I think it's more constructive, healthier and at the end of the day - more fun!
Cheers, Steve.
Harmeet
-- Stephen J. McConnell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.osm.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
