On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 11:48 -0400, Henri Yandell wrote:
> The Web Components thread is much older than the recent set of threads, it
> was back in 2005. So I don't think we've heard your reasons against a JWC
> Sub-Project as opposed to the not-community-of-community threads.
i have worries abou
On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 14:55 -0500, Greg Reddin wrote:
> Sorry to be a latecomer to this thread. I've had some trouble
> subscribing for whatever reason. But I just wanted to add that I am
> working on Standalone Tiles over at the Struts project and am willing
> to support it if it's moved t
uld be a "grouping" rather than a "sub-project". So Tiles would
> > be directly a Jakarta sub-project, rather than a sub-sub-project (i.e.
> > becoming "Jakarta Tiles", not "Jakarta Web Components Tiles").
>
> Yes, you are correct, Tiles
een considerable discussion, on this list and
others, about
the
creation of a Jakarta Web Components sub-project (also previously
known as
Jakarta Silk). I believe the concensus has been in favour of
creating
it.
However, we seemed to get bogged down, several times, in
discussions
of the
name
binding +1 your way.
--
James Mitchell
On Apr 24, 2006, at 11:56 PM, Martin Cooper wrote:
There has been considerable discussion, on this list and others, about
the
creation of a Jakarta Web Components sub-project (also previously
known as
Jakarta Silk). I believe the concensus has been in fa
in Cooper wrote:
There has been considerable discussion, on this list and others, about
the
creation of a Jakarta Web Components sub-project (also previously
known as
Jakarta Silk). I believe the concensus has been in favour of creating
it.
However, we seemed to get
iles would
> be directly a Jakarta sub-project, rather than a sub-sub-project (i.e.
> becoming "Jakarta Tiles", not "Jakarta Web Components Tiles").
Yes, you are correct, Tiles would be a Jakarta sub-project within the JWC
grouping. I guess I was trying to simplify the pr
at 11:56 PM, Martin Cooper wrote:
> >
> >> There has been considerable discussion, on this list and others, about
> >> the
> >> creation of a Jakarta Web Components sub-project (also previously
> >> known as
> >> Jakarta Silk). I believe the concensu
oming "Jakarta Tiles", not "Jakarta Web Components Tiles").
I do also like Andrew's term "sub-community" as that describes the
true intent of having these "groupings".
As far as a formal scope to be attached to the Jakarta Web Components
group goes,
ote, then I, as both a Struts PMC and a Jakarta
PMC member, would throw a binding +1 your way.
--
James Mitchell
On Apr 24, 2006, at 11:56 PM, Martin Cooper wrote:
There has been considerable discussion, on this list and others, about
the
creation of a Jakarta Web Components sub-project (
considerable discussion, on this list and others,
about the
creation of a Jakarta Web Components sub-project (also previously
known as
Jakarta Silk). I believe the concensus has been in favour of
creating it.
However, we seemed to get bogged down, several times, in
discussions of the
name, or of
There has been considerable discussion, on this list and others, about the
creation of a Jakarta Web Components sub-project (also previously known as
Jakarta Silk). I believe the concensus has been in favour of creating it.
However, we seemed to get bogged down, several times, in discussions of
robert burrell donkin wrote:
i think that's one of the advantages of flattening karma and voting: .
we need to separate the formal legal structure (karma, voting) from the
community (developers hanging out) from the ontological (communicating
that the components are).
from an ontological per
On Mon, 2006-03-06 at 19:49 +0100, Ortwin Glück wrote:
>
> Sandy McArthur wrote:
> > As a programmer looking for useful code to help me with uploaded
> > files, I'm going to look in something named Jakarta *Web* Components
> > first. When I see Jakarta HTTP Component
Sandy McArthur wrote:
As a programmer looking for useful code to help me with uploaded
files, I'm going to look in something named Jakarta *Web* Components
first. When I see Jakarta HTTP Components I think of interacting with
the HTTP protocol. I know FileUpload does both, but when I'
On 3/6/06, Nathan Bubna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/6/06, Oleg Kalnichevski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > May I, however, express my (humble) opinion that some of the Commons
> > [FileUpload] code may find a better home in Commons [Codec]. To me, all
> > the mime/multipart parsing logic clea
anywhere.)
As a programmer looking for useful code to help me with uploaded
files, I'm going to look in something named Jakarta *Web* Components
first. When I see Jakarta HTTP Components I think of interacting with
the HTTP protocol. I know FileUpload does both, but when I'm writing
an
On 3/6/06, Oleg Kalnichevski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-03-06 at 10:14 -0800, Martin Cooper wrote:
> > On 3/6/06, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 3/6/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > (feel free to keep discussing names etc, but for
On Mon, 2006-03-06 at 10:14 -0800, Martin Cooper wrote:
> On 3/6/06, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 3/6/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > (feel free to keep discussing names etc, but for the moment I'm going to
> > > go ahead with the one above)
> > >
>
Henri Yandell wrote:
On Mon, 6 Mar 2006, Martin Cooper wrote:
On 3/6/06, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* FileUpload (active, martinc should confirm interest in moving to JWC)
I'm not so sure about this. FileUpload has already cloned some code from
HttpClient, and could undoub
On Mon, 6 Mar 2006, Martin Cooper wrote:
On 3/6/06, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Allow me to informally assemble the beginnings of a roster, hopefully
others can add/remove.
From Commons:
* EL (dormant?)
* FileUpload (active, martinc should confirm interest in moving to JWC)
On 3/6/06, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 3/6/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > (feel free to keep discussing names etc, but for the moment I'm going to
> > go ahead with the one above)
> >
>
>
> But do it within a reasonable time frame (atleast post any objecti
On 3/6/06, Yoav Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hola,
>
> > From Commons:
> >
> > * EL (dormant?)
>
> Tricky status here, and here's why: the JSP 2.1 spec has EL changes,
> and they're significant enough that Jacob Hookum did an almost
> cleanroom implementation of EL. He's a newly-elected T
On Mon, 6 Mar 2006, Yoav Shapira wrote:
Hola,
From Commons:
* EL (dormant?)
Tricky status here, and here's why: the JSP 2.1 spec has EL changes,
and they're significant enough that Jacob Hookum did an almost
cleanroom implementation of EL. He's a newly-elected Tomcat committer
(Tomcat 6
Hola,
> From Commons:
>
> * EL (dormant?)
Tricky status here, and here's why: the JSP 2.1 spec has EL changes,
and they're significant enough that Jacob Hookum did an almost
cleanroom implementation of EL. He's a newly-elected Tomcat committer
(Tomcat 6 will support JSP 2.1) and is in the proce
On 3/6/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> (feel free to keep discussing names etc, but for the moment I'm going to
> go ahead with the one above)
>
But do it within a reasonable time frame (atleast post any objections
to JWC in a week -- I think thats reasonable, unless anyone wants
(feel free to keep discussing names etc, but for the moment I'm going to
go ahead with the one above)
Would anyone like to start putting together a list of constituent parts
for JWC? Please include a proposal for what will happen to any subprojects
left dead by the creation of JWC (ie: Tagli
27 matches
Mail list logo
