I agree completely!
Jim
--On Saturday, April 28, 2001 10:33 AM -0400 Jay Walters
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perhaps stable was the wrong word. I am hoping we don't go to pd3 with
> dependent objects back in for example. As for aiding competition, clearly
> the vendors will make sure that there are fuzzy areas where they can bash
> each other, that is just life. Look at other 'standards' such as SQL.
>
> If they don't get on with it soon (meaning ejb 2.0 done), it will not bode
> well for j2ee imho.
>
> Cheers
> Jay
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Archer
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 4/27/01 10:50 PM
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] EJB 2.0 Spec PD2
>
> Hahahahahahahahaha!!!!!
>
> OK, so I hope your right, but it seems these guys have too much money on
>
> the line to allow a stable spec that aids competition.
>
> I'm completely disgusted with that entire process.
>
> Jim
>
> --On Friday, April 27, 2001 11:24 AM -0400 Jay Walters
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> So now the EJB 2.0 Public draft 2 has been released. Any ideas about
> how
>> stable it will be? It has been a long time coming and I am hoping
> that
>> the fighting has been done and now it's just about ready to go.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Jay
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Jboss-development mailing list
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>
>
>
> ********************************************
> I shall be telling this with a sigh
> Somewhere ages and ages hence:
> Two roads diverged in a wood, and I -
> I took the one less traveled by,
> And that has made all the difference.
>
> - Robert Frost, 1916
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
