On Sat, 04 Jul 2009 16:03:48 +0200, Maciej Stachowiak <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Jul 4, 2009, at 4:56 AM, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
We are "potentially interested" - i.e. we want to see how the spec
comes out first. Given that this is in the scope of existing
deliverables, and given taht Oracle are providing the resources to edit
it, I see no reason to simply stand in their way.
I think a B-Tree style storage API would clearly be in scope of existing
deliverables. However, it's not clear to me that Oracles's other
proposals (programmable http cache, request interception) are. As I
understand it, those technologies don't really relate to storage, or
even networking as such, but are meant to serve a role similar to
HTML5's Application Cache feature. Also, Nikunj's request was to add
these things to the charter, from which I infered the charter doesn't
already obviously cover them.
As I noted in my earlier message to Nikunj, as far as we (chairs, staff
contacts and domain lead) can see the features *do* relate to storage, and
are in scope of the charter as is.
So it's OK, you don't need to worry about the charter changing.
cheers
Chaals
--
Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group
je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
