Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?

2003-03-12 Thread Santiago Gala
Previously: Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Lets talk about what a great thing the portlet specification committee has done for the Jetspeed project. Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Yes, lets do that. (That's 1 out of 200 or so, so while there may be a problem with that specific JSR, we might have to

Re: JCP NDA (was: too many similar projects?)

2003-03-12 Thread Santiago Gala
Rich Persaud wrote: Pier wrote: | Most of the times, in my experience, it all comes down to how receptive | the spec lead is in regards to new ideas coming from outside, and how much | weight he has in his company (the JSR sponsoring company)... | | But my experience is too little to say

Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?

2003-03-12 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr .
On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 03:05 AM, Santiago Gala wrote: Previously: Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Lets talk about what a great thing the portlet specification committee has done for the Jetspeed project. Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Yes, lets do that. (That's 1 out of 200 or so, so while

Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?

2003-03-12 Thread Andrew C. Oliver
Any set of interactions among people with common interests (incl. NDAs) creates a community. Those within may debate values or objectives, but a community only becomes real via the experiences of *external* people, That would be awesome. A community of people who are bound by NDAs and

Re: JCP NDA (was: too many similar projects?)

2003-03-12 Thread Andrew C. Oliver
Rich Persaud wrote: Ok, there's no separate NDA, it's part of the standard agreements: http://jcp.org/en/participation/membership Follow-up questions: 1. Is there an Apache-specific, public archive of JCP discussion, including the negotiation of JCP 2.5? This seems to exclude [EMAIL

Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?

2003-03-12 Thread Andrew C. Oliver
One way we can do this is for ourselves to do be spec leads for JSR's. Then we can set the rules for the group, and the license. Jetspeed has been around for a while - it was only recently that IBM (and ?) proposed the JSR. We could have done it long before that. What if later we want to

RE: Jakarta: too many similar projects?

2003-03-12 Thread Howard M. Lewis Ship
Well - that's one way to describe it. The other way is that the JCP is how innovations are brought to the platform - the innovation was done before you tried to make a JSR. For example, Jason Hunter is running a JSR for JDOM. JDOM was done, and the benefits of the software

Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?

2003-03-12 Thread Andrew C. Oliver
Either a community a) doesn't want to, in which case it doesn't matter how the Evil Tyrannical Sun That Controls All behaves or b) it does, but only as a participant on the EG (from which info can be shared, I suppose - certainly something that can be negotiated with the leads on the JSR),

Re: JCP NDA (was: too many similar projects?)

2003-03-12 Thread Sam Ruby
Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Rich Persaud wrote: Ok, there's no separate NDA, it's part of the standard agreements: http://jcp.org/en/participation/membership Follow-up questions: 1. Is there an Apache-specific, public archive of JCP discussion, including the negotiation of JCP 2.5? This seems

Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?

2003-03-12 Thread Santiago Gala
Andrew C. Oliver wrote: What if later we want to do a .NET portlet or a (whatever comes along that is against Sun's interest) portlet spec? I think Sun's NDA is not that bad (but I don't want to re-read it to check). Once the JSR gets public, there is no provision against free use of what

RE: Jakarta: too many similar projects?

2003-03-12 Thread Paulo Silveira
What if later we want to do a .NET portlet or a (whatever comes along that is against Sun's interest) portlet spec? Call it portal.net and change the method names to begin with a capital letter. done. -- Paulo - To

Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?

2003-03-12 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr .
On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 08:42 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: One way we can do this is for ourselves to do be spec leads for JSR's. Then we can set the rules for the group, and the license. Jetspeed has been around for a while - it was only recently that IBM (and ?) proposed the JSR.

Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?

2003-03-12 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr .
On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 09:02 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Either a community a) doesn't want to, in which case it doesn't matter how the Evil Tyrannical Sun That Controls All behaves or b) it does, but only as a participant on the EG (from which info can be shared, I suppose -

Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?

2003-03-12 Thread Andrew C. Oliver
Paulo Silveira wrote: What if later we want to do a .NET portlet or a (whatever comes along that is against Sun's interest) portlet spec? Call it portal.net and change the method names to begin with a capital letter. done. And I don't have the privilege of speaking with Sun's lawyers?

Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?

2003-03-12 Thread Andrew C. Oliver
d) Convince everyone that they don't need the silly JCP or JSRs and just set the standards and be real damn clear that we mean to set the de-facto standard while laughing at Ra. OpenSource is the standard. Go for it. I am... -Andy

Re: Jakarta: too many similar projects?

2003-03-12 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr .
On Wednesday, March 12, 2003, at 05:18 PM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Paulo Silveira wrote: What if later we want to do a .NET portlet or a (whatever comes along that is against Sun's interest) portlet spec? Call it portal.net and change the method names to begin with a capital letter. done. And I