You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> on 2009/11/18 20:46:30 UTC
Re: [validator] Direction of validator implementation based on JSR 303
Apologies for chiming in late.
From a Geronimo/EE 6 perspective, I'm definitely interested in seeing a 303 implementation at Apache. I'm not likely to have much time for implementation. However, if champions or mentors are needed, I'd be willing to help.
On Nov 4, 2009, at 11:27 AM, Donald Woods wrote:
> Niall Pemberton wrote:
<snip>
>> Its the normal route to have separate lists @incubator - but I don't
>> see why it has to go that way. If Commons is the intended destination
>> then it will make acceptance by Commons smoother since they will see
>> the activity during incubation. Anyway, I'm not wedded to this idea
>> but I would like to start with that basis - if there is a negative
>> reaction either here or if/when it goes to general@incubator then we
>> can revert to the usual model. Is your objection because you don't
>> like it or because you don't think it would be allowed?
>
> No objection. I just hadn't seen any other Podlings do it this way... It's worth a try.
Subversion is going to be using non-incubator mailing lists. So, there is some precedent. No harm in trying, IMO...
--kevan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [validator] Direction of validator implementation based on JSR
303
Posted by Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 7:46 PM, Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Apologies for chiming in late.
>
> From a Geronimo/EE 6 perspective, I'm definitely interested in seeing a 303 implementation at Apache. I'm not likely to have much time for implementation. However, if champions or mentors are needed, I'd be willing to help.
Great - I added you to the proposal - thanks
Niall
> On Nov 4, 2009, at 11:27 AM, Donald Woods wrote:
>
>> Niall Pemberton wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>> Its the normal route to have separate lists @incubator - but I don't
>>> see why it has to go that way. If Commons is the intended destination
>>> then it will make acceptance by Commons smoother since they will see
>>> the activity during incubation. Anyway, I'm not wedded to this idea
>>> but I would like to start with that basis - if there is a negative
>>> reaction either here or if/when it goes to general@incubator then we
>>> can revert to the usual model. Is your objection because you don't
>>> like it or because you don't think it would be allowed?
>>
>> No objection. I just hadn't seen any other Podlings do it this way... It's worth a try.
>
> Subversion is going to be using non-incubator mailing lists. So, there is some precedent. No harm in trying, IMO...
>
> --kevan
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org