On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Michael McGrady <mmcgr...@topiatechnology.com> wrote: > There needs to be a lot more said than this and no I could not say I would > be happy but this certainly captures the spirit of what I believe would be > desirable. I making jINI one among many here as it were does a lot to solve > some significant issues. There still are troubles with this but I think > this is not the same and would definitely help.
>> Apache River Lease >> Apache River Transaction >> Apache River Entry >> Apache River JavaSpaces >> Apache River Jini Service Platform In Architectural Terms (since you are keen on talking about that), this is what we already have. From a packaging and codebase organizational point of view, it is not separated at the moment, but is something that I would like to see happening. Cheers Niclas
