Mmm, so back in the day we had the Jini Technical Oversight Committee - couple of houses, one commercial, one non (I've got a feeling there was a third house, general). I don't recall it formally anointing standards and such but it could have done. It's a variation on the JCP ultimately which I know is broken by virtue of abuse of an all powerful owning interest. No need for it to be broken in our case if we allow the entire community to decide who's on-board.
I could see a TOC like thing working reasonably well - expert developers and expert users, working to develop specs which can then be turned into an implementation (or indeed prototyped along the way). There is of course only one implementation right now... That ultimately may be what we get down to - do we entertain the idea there may be another implementation in the future? I suspect probably not a whole Kit but maybe individual services. If there are individual service implementers (oh, like me, say) then specs and some kind of TOC to look after them and protect the interests of "core" developers, independent service implementers and users, might be a way to go. There might well be some work to do on cleaning up specs and such to account for com.sun.* or at least the current River implementation.... Two cents, Dan. On 30 January 2011 10:02, Peter Firmstone <j...@zeus.net.au> wrote: > Ok, why not, that's a reasonable suggestion, have you got any thoughts on > how we might manage the Jini Standards Process? > > Cheers, > > Peter. > > > Dan Creswell wrote: > >> I think the name we choose is probably related to the other discussion >> about >> how we handle specifications....At least part of the kit's responsibility >> is >> to ensure compatibility with the specs IMHO. >> >> On that basis I'd be calling it Jini Compatibility Kit but, well, it's >> only >> a name and so long as it's clear what the kit itself is for/does it don't >> matter soooo much. >> >> >> On 30 January 2011 02:32, Peter Firmstone <j...@zeus.net.au> wrote: >> >> >> >>> We had a number of suggestions for the Jini TCK subproject, thanks to all >>> who put forward suggestions and participated: >>> >>> * Jini Compatibility Kit >>> * Chastise >>> * >>> >>> River Compatibility Kit or RiCK >>> >>> * Torturer >>> * River Delta >>> * River TCK >>> >>> I propose that we assign the project name: >>> >>> "Rick" - River's Compatibility Kit. >>> >>> and describe it as: >>> >>> A test kit to ensure compatibility and compliance of services, proxy's >>> and >>> clients with the Jini TM specifications: >>> >>> Jini TM lookup service specification v1.1 >>> Jini TM discovery and join specification v3.0 >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Peter. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > >
