Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Hi, here some more answers to questions that arouse: - Pluto is only the reference implementation for the Portlet API defined in the JSR 168 This is comparable with the tomcat being the servlet container and implementing the servlet API. Pluto itself is only a infrastructure component. All porta

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Steven Noels wrote: I was trying not to post the obvious, but yes: this seems largely premature. No code, a restricted community, too much committers coming from one company, I've seen better proposals being fought over lately. Also, possible future integration 'ideas' with some related projec

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

I realy think JetSpeed could use competition, to make it better. .V Alex McLintock wrote: At 13:38 21/01/03, Stefan Hepper wrote: Hi all, I would like to propose a new Jakarta project, named Pluto, that should provide the reference implementation of the JSR 168 Portlet Specification. Please s

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Luta, Raphael (VUN) wrote: > From: Henri Yandell generationjava.com> > > > > Is this different from Tomcat and/or JSTL? If so, how? > > > > I'm clueless on portlets, but from my 'vague consumer' view, I thought > > the JSR was standardising a lot of what Jetspeed does. > >

Re: PMC members, can u help me??

Eduardo Andrés Alfonso Sierra wrote: Hi again, I wrote this message a few days ago... Hi I'm an undergraduate student of Computer Science and I'm interested in how a group of developers that are geographically separated works. You are exactly that kind of group. I wanna know what specifi

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

From: Henri Yandell generationjava.com> > On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Steven Noels wrote: > > Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > > > > project. I do kinda think a project proposal might be premature since > > > the specification isn't public yet. > > > > I was trying not to post the obvious, but yes: this seem

Re: New Projects

on 2003/1/21 8:10 AM, "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jon Scott Stevens wrote: >> What is it with IBM people suddenly wanting to start projects based around >> JSR's? Looks suspicious to me. > > IBM has proposed ASF projects in the past. IBM has both lead and > participated in JSRs. In

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Craig R. McClanahan wrote: Totally! Anyone doing portal work will probably understand the need for this. -Andy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: [PMC VOTE] PMC Nominations

Sam Ruby wrote: Charles Burdick wrote: The criteria you used for nominating people seems a bit weird to me. Release managers I understand somewhat, but contributers to the newsletter? That's like saying those that baked cookies for the last board meeting should be nominated. IMHO, this mai

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Costin Manolache wrote: > Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 11:31:32 -0800 > From: Costin Manolache <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: Jakarta General List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto > > Alex McLintock wrote: > > > At 17:41 21/01

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Stefan Hepper wrote: Hi, here some answers to questions asked in this thread: - Apache was one of the first memebers in the JSR 168 Expert Group and IBM asked Apache explicitly for their support before submitting this JSR. Currently the Apache resprentative in the Expert Group is David Sean Ta

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Sam Ruby wrote: Steven Noels wrote: > > I was trying not to post the obvious, but yes: this seems largely > premature. Deja vu. Check back next week for the inevitable complaint that Pluto is too mature. > No code, a restricted community, too much committers coming from one > company, I've

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Alex McLintock wrote: > At 17:41 21/01/03, you wrote: >>One more question: why not doing this as a subproject of JetSpeed ? >>It is an existing jakarta project, the scope matches - why >>creating a separate jakarta community instead of joining the >>existing one ? > > > I assume that it would be

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Alex McLintock wrote: At 17:41 21/01/03, you wrote: One more question: why not doing this as a subproject of JetSpeed ? It is an existing jakarta project, the scope matches - why creating a separate jakarta community instead of joining the existing one ? I assume that it would be a tool whic

Re: [PMC VOTE] PMC Nominations

Charles Burdick wrote: The criteria you used for nominating people seems a bit weird to me. Release managers I understand somewhat, but contributers to the newsletter? That's like saying those that baked cookies for the last board meeting should be nominated. I have a lot more respect for the n

Re: [PMC VOTE] PMC Nominations

The criteria you used for nominating people seems a bit weird to me. Release managers I understand somewhat, but contributers to the newsletter? That's like saying those that baked cookies for the last board meeting should be nominated. Weird. Arbitrary. Rewards self-promotion, not necessarily

Re: Light Weight JDO Implementation?

Hi again Robert, Robert Simmons wrote: Interesting your replies. I actually looked at OJB in consideration of a book I am working on in which I use JDO. What I donate want to have to do is allot of complex configuration and initialization to get it to work. Although I am interested in writing JDO

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

At 17:41 21/01/03, you wrote: One more question: why not doing this as a subproject of JetSpeed ? It is an existing jakarta project, the scope matches - why creating a separate jakarta community instead of joining the existing one ? I assume that it would be a tool which could be used by the Co

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

One more question: why not doing this as a subproject of JetSpeed ? It is an existing jakarta project, the scope matches - why creating a separate jakarta community instead of joining the existing one ? If in a bright future Jakarta will be a single community - having pluto as a subproject of je

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Hi, here some answers to questions asked in this thread: - Apache was one of the first memebers in the JSR 168 Expert Group and IBM asked Apache explicitly for their support before submitting this JSR. Currently the Apache resprentative in the Expert Group is David Sean Taylor from the JetSpeed

Re: New Projects

Jon Scott Stevens wrote: What is it with IBM people suddenly wanting to start projects based around JSR's? Looks suspicious to me. IBM has proposed ASF projects in the past. IBM has both lead and participated in JSRs. In fact, JSR 110 is both lead by IBM and has an open source reference impl

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Oops! My bad...http://jakarta.apache.org/site/idiot.html to me! I sent the original mail as a reflexive response! I hadn't read the wiki page first. Paul Balogh said: > > I've been away from the Jetspeed list, but I believe that they are intending > to fully support JSR168. > > http://jakarta.

àÊÃÔÁÊÃéҧʶҹФÃͺ¤ÃÑÇáÅеÑÇàͧãËé´Õ¢Öé¹

âÍ¡ÒÊ·Ò§¸ØáԨÍÔÊÃÐ ·Óä´é·Ñé§ part time/full time à¾×èÍ»ÕãËÁè ªÕÇÔµãËÁè ¢éÒ¾à¨éÒÃèÇÁ¸ØáԨ»ÃÐÁÒ³ 8 à´×͹ÁÕÃÒÂä´é»ÃÐÁÒ³ 35,000 ºÒ·/à´×͹ ´éÇÂá¹Ç¤Ô´·Õèà»ç¹¨ÃÔ§ ´Ñ§µèÍ仹Õé - à¾×èÍÁÕà§Ô¹ÊÒÁÒöà¡çºÍÍÁä´éÁÒ¡¢Öé¹ - ÁդسÀÒ¾ªÕÇÔµ·Õè´Õ¢Öé¹ ÊÒÁÒö«ÕéÍÊÔ觵èÒ§æä´éµÒÁ¤ÇÒÁµÑé§ã¨ - ÃѺ¼Ô´ªÍº¤¹ã¹¤Ãͺ¤ÃÑÇä´é´ÕÂÔ

Re: Light Weight JDO Implementation?

Interesting your replies. I actually looked at OJB in consideration of a book I am working on in which I use JDO. What I donate want to have to do is allot of complex configuration and initialization to get it to work. Although I am interested in writing JDO code, at this moment I'm a pure user. In

Re: Light Weight JDO Implementation?

On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Robert Simmons wrote: > Greetings, > > I was wondering if there was a JDO implementation in the planning stages. Not heard of any group at Apache doing so except the OJB people. > I know, you are probably going to answer, "Go look at OJB." However, > to face reality, OJB w

AW: Light Weight JDO Implementation?

Hi Robert, > > Greetings, > > I was wondering if there was a JDO implementation in the > planning stages. OJB provides a plugin to the JDO reference implementation. By using this plugin you can write JDO compliant applications running against the OJB O/R mapping. See here for a sample applic

Light Weight JDO Implementation?

Greetings, I was wondering if there was a JDO implementation in the planning stages. I know, you are probably going to answer, "Go look at OJB." However, to face reality, OJB was started and an OMG data mapping implementation. It is far too big to be warped into a world class JDO implementati

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Sam Ruby wrote: Steven Noels wrote: > > I was trying not to post the obvious, but yes: this seems largely > premature. Deja vu. What else could one expect ;-) Check back next week for the inevitable complaint that Pluto is too mature. > No code, a restricted community, too much committer

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

As this is an implementation of a JSR, I believe that the <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailing list should be made aware of those plans... I forwarded your email there... Pier "Stefan Hepper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > I would like to propose a new Jakarta project, named Pluto, that shou

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

I've been away from the Jetspeed list, but I believe that they are intending to fully support JSR168. http://jakarta.apache.org/jetspeed/ -- Paul Balogh Co-Owner / Lead Developer The Netrix Group www.netrixgroup.com "We live for this stuff..." Andrew C. Oliver said: > I would like to state m

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Steven Noels wrote: > > I was trying not to post the obvious, but yes: this seems largely > premature. Deja vu. Check back next week for the inevitable complaint that Pluto is too mature. > No code, a restricted community, too much committers coming from one > company, I've seen better proposals

Re: New Projects

Have there been others than Charon/Pluto [which seem to be the same thing ish]? Hen On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Jon Scott Stevens wrote: > What is it with IBM people suddenly wanting to start projects based around > JSR's? Looks suspicious to me. > > -jon > > -- > StudioZ.tv /\ Bar/Nightclub/Entertai

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

At 13:38 21/01/03, Stefan Hepper wrote: Hi all, I would like to propose a new Jakarta project, named Pluto, that should provide the reference implementation of the JSR 168 Portlet Specification. Please see http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?PlutoProposal for more details (I've also atta

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Henri Yandell wrote: Is this not-invented-here-ism or maintaining scope? From my part: scope & fairness. -- Steven Noelshttp://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center Read my weblog athttp://blogs.cocoondev.org

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Steven Noels wrote: > Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > > project. I do kinda think a project proposal might be premature since > > the specification isn't public yet. > > I was trying not to post the obvious, but yes: this seems largely > premature. No code, a restricted communi

New Projects

What is it with IBM people suddenly wanting to start projects based around JSR's? Looks suspicious to me. -jon -- StudioZ.tv /\ Bar/Nightclub/Entertainment 314 11th Street @ Folsom /\ San Francisco http://studioz.tv/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additiona

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Note the mail was cc'd to both. Conor MacNeill wrote: Stefan Hepper wrote: Hi all, I would like to propose a new Jakarta project, named Pluto, that should provide the reference implementation of the JSR 168 Portlet Specification. Please see http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?PlutoP

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Andrew C. Oliver wrote: I would like to state my support and desire to be involved in the project. I do kinda think a project proposal might be premature since the specification isn't public yet. I was trying not to post the obvious, but yes: this seems largely premature. No code, a restrict

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Stefan Hepper wrote: Hi all, I would like to propose a new Jakarta project, named Pluto, that should provide the reference implementation of the JSR 168 Portlet Specification. Please see http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?PlutoProposal for more details (I've also attached the proposal b

New Jakarta proposal: Charon

Hi, I would like to propose a new Jakarta project, named Charon, that should provide a demo implementation of the WSRP Specification (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/wsrp/). Please see http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?CharonProposal for more details (I've also attached the propos

Re: [PMC VOTE] PMC Nominations

Sam Ruby wrote: On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, Andrew C. Oliver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I propose to nominate Glen Stampoultzis On 16 Jan 2003, Martin van den Bemt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Also want ask you to also nominate Robert Burrel Donkin. +1 to both. +1 Conor -- To unsubscribe,

Re: New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

I would like to state my support and desire to be involved in the project. I do kinda think a project proposal might be premature since the specification isn't public yet. -Andy Stefan Hepper wrote: Hi all, I would like to propose a new Jakarta project, named Pluto, that should provide the re

Re: [PMC VOTE] PMC Nominations

On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, Andrew C. Oliver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I propose to nominate Glen Stampoultzis On 16 Jan 2003, Martin van den Bemt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Also want ask you to also nominate Robert Burrel Donkin. +1 to both. It is my intent to declare this vote closed immediate

New Jakarta proposal: Pluto

Hi all, I would like to propose a new Jakarta project, named Pluto, that should provide the reference implementation of the JSR 168 Portlet Specification. Please see http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?PlutoProposal for more details (I've also attached the proposal below). Regards, S