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
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
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 whil
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
can
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 PROT
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 do
> >
> > 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
> >
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), o
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 t
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 the
>
> 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 un
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. W
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 - certai
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?
-
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
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
16 matches
Mail list logo
