Re: [functor] revival WAS Functor Users / Project Management?
--- Alex Marshall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I'm curious if the vote was ever taken, and if so, what was the result ? I'd very much like to see Functor come alive again and start taking advantage of the benefits of Java 5/6. No vote has been taken. I'll start one when my time starts to look like I'll have some to spare for [functor], unless someone else wants to start the vote sooner. br, Matt Alex Marshall Software Developer Email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] MSN Messenger:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 137350791 Skype username: alex.marshall Office: 1-888-286-2010 Ext 229 Fax: 1-780-484-0538 CONFIDENTIAL: This message, including any attachments, may contain confidential and/or privileged information, which is intended solely for the use of the addressee(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the original message. Rahul Akolkar wrote: On 5/30/07, Matt Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip/ Right, I meant whether the vote should be held as in are there any reasons why reviving [functor] would be simply out of the question? I wasn't implying any desire to circumvent established protocols. :) snap/ Not sure if there is an established protocol :-) (other than that bit on the site, since dormancy has sort of been a one-way street -- I'm for voting). -Rahul -Matt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection. Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta. http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [functor] revival WAS Functor Users / Project Management?
Hello, I'm curious if the vote was ever taken, and if so, what was the result ? I'd very much like to see Functor come alive again and start taking advantage of the benefits of Java 5/6. Alex Marshall Software Developer Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSN Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ:137350791 Skype username: alex.marshall Office: 1-888-286-2010 Ext 229 Fax:1-780-484-0538 CONFIDENTIAL: This message, including any attachments, may contain confidential and/or privileged information, which is intended solely for the use of the addressee(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the original message. Rahul Akolkar wrote: On 5/30/07, Matt Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip/ Right, I meant whether the vote should be held as in are there any reasons why reviving [functor] would be simply out of the question? I wasn't implying any desire to circumvent established protocols. :) snap/ Not sure if there is an established protocol :-) (other than that bit on the site, since dormancy has sort of been a one-way street -- I'm for voting). -Rahul -Matt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [functor] revival WAS Functor Users / Project Management?
Hi Pete-- I could be interested in being the Jakarta commons conduit for a revival of the functor code. According to the jakarta website, A revival of a Commons Dormant component must be preceded by a VOTE on the commons developers mailing list. Is there a general feeling on-list as to whether the vote should be held, or any thoughts on why the revival of [functor] would be ill-advised? -Matt --- Pete Aykroyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, I'm not really sure how this is done but over the past year and a half or so, I've been working one of the original functor contributors, Jason Horman, on a branch of functor and we've made a lot of progress with it. For example, it's updated to take advantage of generics which is extremely helpful and also have done a lot work developing compilers that allows you to translate expressions into runtime functions, etc. This has been extremely useful for us on our project and we'd like to get this code back into the main branch. I've emailed Rodney Waldhoff, who is listed as the project lead for functor but haven't heard back. There's been no progress on functor since 2005 and I don't want to step on toes, but I'm also interested in contributing to the community. Any pointers on what can be done would be appreciated. Thanks, Pete - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos. http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [functor] revival WAS Functor Users / Project Management?
--- Rahul Akolkar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/30/07, Matt Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Pete-- I could be interested in being the Jakarta commons conduit for a revival of the functor code. According to the jakarta website, A revival of a Commons Dormant component must be preceded by a VOTE on the commons developers mailing list. Is there a general feeling on-list as to whether the vote should be held, snip/ I think its good to have the vote as suggested (after any preliminary discussion here). While its a lower bar than sandbox graduation, I think its useful to gauge interest and makes it harder for the change to slip under people's radar etc. As an aside, I do not have any cycles to help with functor ATM. Right, I meant whether the vote should be held as in are there any reasons why reviving [functor] would be simply out of the question? I wasn't implying any desire to circumvent established protocols. :) -Matt -Rahul [SNIP] Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're surfing. http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/index.php - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [functor] revival WAS Functor Users / Project Management?
On 5/30/07, Matt Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Pete-- I could be interested in being the Jakarta commons conduit for a revival of the functor code. According to the jakarta website, A revival of a Commons Dormant component must be preceded by a VOTE on the commons developers mailing list. Is there a general feeling on-list as to whether the vote should be held, snip/ I think its good to have the vote as suggested (after any preliminary discussion here). While its a lower bar than sandbox graduation, I think its useful to gauge interest and makes it harder for the change to slip under people's radar etc. As an aside, I do not have any cycles to help with functor ATM. -Rahul or any thoughts on why the revival of [functor] would be ill-advised? -Matt --- Pete Aykroyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, I'm not really sure how this is done but over the past year and a half or so, I've been working one of the original functor contributors, Jason Horman, on a branch of functor and we've made a lot of progress with it. For example, it's updated to take advantage of generics which is extremely helpful and also have done a lot work developing compilers that allows you to translate expressions into runtime functions, etc. This has been extremely useful for us on our project and we'd like to get this code back into the main branch. I've emailed Rodney Waldhoff, who is listed as the project lead for functor but haven't heard back. There's been no progress on functor since 2005 and I don't want to step on toes, but I'm also interested in contributing to the community. Any pointers on what can be done would be appreciated. Thanks, Pete - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [functor] revival WAS Functor Users / Project Management?
On 5/30/07, Matt Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip/ Right, I meant whether the vote should be held as in are there any reasons why reviving [functor] would be simply out of the question? I wasn't implying any desire to circumvent established protocols. :) snap/ Not sure if there is an established protocol :-) (other than that bit on the site, since dormancy has sort of been a one-way street -- I'm for voting). -Rahul -Matt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
