Re: [DISCUSS] altering the Tuscany "Charter" in relation to SDO Java

[kelvin goodson <ke...@thegoodsons.org.uk>]

Sorry Venkat,  I didn't explicitly respond to your posting,  but I hope the
answers I gave to Sebastien's similar line of questioning makes it clear.
Please let me know if not.

Kelvin.

On 28/02/2008, Venkata Krishnan <fo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> "This software will implement relevant open standards including, but not
> limited to, the
>   SCA standard defined by the OASIS OpenCSA member section, and related
>   technologies."
>
>
> When we say "including but not limited to" I understand that it would very
> well contain SDO and others implicitly.  Or, does this have a different
> interprettation ?
>
> - Venkat
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:00 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
> jsdelfino@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > kelvin goodson wrote:
> > > Implicit in this rewording is the understanding within the Tuscany
> > community
> > > that there would be one Apache home for SDO Java development.   When
> > this
> > > thread is referenced in proposal for the new project, or discussions
> > around
> > > it,  it must be clear to the wider Apache community that the Tuscany
> > > community accepts that.  Without this clear acceptance I fear the new
> > > project will face further periods of delay whilst questions are asked
> > about
> > > the Tuscany communities intentions with regards to SDO Java
> development.
> > >
> > > So the answer to your question is conditional.
> > > If the new project is accepted an an incubator ....
> > >
> > > - does not require Tuscany to implement SDO anymore --- yes
> > > - and still allows Tuscany to implement SDO   --- no
> > > - and still allows Tuscany to use SDO or any other related technology?
> > ---
> > > yes
> > >
> > > if the project is not accepted as an incubator ...
> > >
> > > - does not require Tuscany to implement SDO anymore --- yes
> > > - and still allows Tuscany to implement SDO   --- yes
> > > - and still allows Tuscany to use SDO or any other related technology?
> > ---
> > > yes
> > >
> >
> > I'm trying to understand how to vote, or if I should vote, on your other
> > thread. Maybe I'm missing something. There is an SDO implementation in
> > Tuscany at the moment. SDO is a "related technology" worked on in
> > OpenCSA too. Why would we want to remove it from the charter?
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Sebastien
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
> >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] altering the Tuscany "Charter" in relation to SDO Java

[Venkata Krishnan <fo...@gmail.com>]

Hey, that's np.  Your response to Sebastien was elaborate enuf :) .  Thanks.

On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 4:30 PM, kelvin goodson <ke...@thegoodsons.org.uk>
wrote:

> Sorry Venkat,  I didn't explicitly respond to your posting,  but I hope
> the
> answers I gave to Sebastien's similar line of questioning makes it clear.
> Please let me know if not.
>
> Kelvin.
>
> On 28/02/2008, Venkata Krishnan <fo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > "This software will implement relevant open standards including, but not
> > limited to, the
> >   SCA standard defined by the OASIS OpenCSA member section, and related
> >   technologies."
> >
> >
> > When we say "including but not limited to" I understand that it would
> very
> > well contain SDO and others implicitly.  Or, does this have a different
> > interprettation ?
> >
> > - Venkat
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:00 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <
> > jsdelfino@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > kelvin goodson wrote:
> > > > Implicit in this rewording is the understanding within the Tuscany
> > > community
> > > > that there would be one Apache home for SDO Java development.   When
> > > this
> > > > thread is referenced in proposal for the new project, or discussions
> > > around
> > > > it,  it must be clear to the wider Apache community that the Tuscany
> > > > community accepts that.  Without this clear acceptance I fear the
> new
> > > > project will face further periods of delay whilst questions are
> asked
> > > about
> > > > the Tuscany communities intentions with regards to SDO Java
> > development.
> > > >
> > > > So the answer to your question is conditional.
> > > > If the new project is accepted an an incubator ....
> > > >
> > > > - does not require Tuscany to implement SDO anymore --- yes
> > > > - and still allows Tuscany to implement SDO   --- no
> > > > - and still allows Tuscany to use SDO or any other related
> technology?
> > > ---
> > > > yes
> > > >
> > > > if the project is not accepted as an incubator ...
> > > >
> > > > - does not require Tuscany to implement SDO anymore --- yes
> > > > - and still allows Tuscany to implement SDO   --- yes
> > > > - and still allows Tuscany to use SDO or any other related
> technology?
> > > ---
> > > > yes
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm trying to understand how to vote, or if I should vote, on your
> other
> > > thread. Maybe I'm missing something. There is an SDO implementation in
> > > Tuscany at the moment. SDO is a "related technology" worked on in
> > > OpenCSA too. Why would we want to remove it from the charter?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Sebastien
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>