I think the incubator should take in to account that committers/memebers
w/in the Jakarta Community have serious reservations about the community
issues here. While I really want to see this happen here, Steven is
right to question some serious community issues. BTW here are mine:
Please
Conor MacNeill wrote:
Steven,
I think these are exactly the sort of questions incubator is designed to
answer. Tapestry was about seeing how an existing project can come into
Apache. Perhaps Pluto is an opportunity to understand how a new project
can be created and encouraged at Apache. They
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
Please note that my support is based on the following assumptions:
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?TalkPlutoProposal
Andy,
This is an *excellent* list to work from. Thanks!
- Sam Ruby
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional
Stefan Hepper wrote:
- 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 portal related
functionality
Steven Noels wrote:
Conor MacNeill wrote:
Steven,
I think these are exactly the sort of questions incubator is designed to
answer. Tapestry was about seeing how an existing project can come into
Apache. Perhaps Pluto is an opportunity to understand how a new project
can be created and
At 08:20 PM 1/22/2003 +0100, you wrote:
I will try to join both Pluto and Charon, also, time and health
permitting. Even if I am not very active lately, I'm still tracking Cocoon
and Jetspeed as much as I can. I'm better at bug fixing, critisizing and
generic hacking than a true programmer,
On Wednesday, January 22, 2003, at 03:51 PM, Costin Manolache wrote:
snip
I would preffer that all portlet-related technology would be in the same
project and community, with JSP/struts/cocoon specific areas. Maybe an
commons-like project.
+1 (providing that andrew's reservations about pluto
Sam Ruby wrote:
robert burrell donkin wrote:
+1 (providing that andrew's reservations about pluto are resolved)
why not portlet.apache.org (with jetspeed and pluto as subprojects)?
I predict that something along those lines will eventually occur. The
question is whether to gate this
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
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
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
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
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 community, too
Henri Yandell wrote:
Is this not-invented-here-ism or maintaining scope?
From my part: scope fairness.
/Steven
--
Steven Noelshttp://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at
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
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
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 my
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 should
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 committers
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
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
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
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
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
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
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 21/01/03, you
Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
snip/
Totally! Anyone doing portal work will probably understand the need for
this.
-Andy
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Henri Yandell bayard at 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 seems
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Luta, Raphael (VUN) wrote:
From: Henri Yandell bayard at 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.
A
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
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
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
32 matches
Mail list logo
