ObjectWeb Consortium
Search ObjectWeb Mail Archive: 

Advanced Search - Powered by Google


Mail Archive Home | eclipse-stp List | June 2006 Index

<--  Date Index  --> <--  Thread Index  -->

Fwd: [stp-dev] SC subproject issues


Could we have any proposal or suggestion ?

Cheers,
Alain

----- Forwarded message from Daniel Berg <danberg@xxxxxxxxxx> -----
    Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 11:54:45 -0400
    From: Daniel Berg <danberg@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: STP Dev list <stp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
 Subject: [stp-dev] SC subproject issues
      To: STP Dev list <stp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

I have several issues with this subproject first of which is the need for 
the subproject.  It is not very clear at all and has a great deal of 
overlap with what is already defined in the core subproject.

However my biggest problem is with the exemplar contribution.  Why in the 
world would we choose to use Celtix as the exemplar implementation?  First 
of all Celtix is a specific runtime technology and is not a simple 
implementation type.  Second we should be using standards for our 
exemplar.  In the core subproject we are planning to contribute the Java 
implementation as the exemplar.  That seems much more reasonable than 
Celtix.  If you want a more complex implementation type we could look at 
Java EE 5.  I think having Celtix integrated in this framework is fine but 
not as the exemplar.

Anyone else have an opinion?

Regards,
Dan

----- End forwarded message -----


I have several issues with this subproject first of which is the need for 
the subproject.  It is not very clear at all and has a great deal of 
overlap with what is already defined in the core subproject.

However my biggest problem is with the exemplar contribution.  Why in the 
world would we choose to use Celtix as the exemplar implementation?  First 
of all Celtix is a specific runtime technology and is not a simple 
implementation type.  Second we should be using standards for our 
exemplar.  In the core subproject we are planning to contribute the Java 
implementation as the exemplar.  That seems much more reasonable than 
Celtix.  If you want a more complex implementation type we could look at 
Java EE 5.  I think having Celtix integrated in this framework is fine but 
not as the exemplar.

Anyone else have an opinion?

Regards,
Dan

I have several issues with this subproject first of which is the need for the subproject.  It is not very clear at all and has a great deal of overlap with what is already defined in the core subproject.

However my biggest problem is with the exemplar contribution.  Why in the world would we choose to use Celtix as the exemplar implementation?  First of all Celtix is a specific runtime technology and is not a simple implementation type.  Second we should be using standards for our exemplar.  In the core subproject we are planning to contribute the Java implementation as the exemplar.  That seems much more reasonable than Celtix.  If you want a more complex implementation type we could look at Java EE 5.  I think having Celtix integrated in this framework is fine but not as the exemplar.

Anyone else have an opinion?

Regards,
Dan
_______________________________________________
stp-dev mailing list
stp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/stp-dev


<--  Date Index  --> <--  Thread Index  -->

Reply via email to:

Powered by MHonArc.

Copyright © 1999-2005, ObjectWeb Consortium | contact | webmaster.