RE: [Aglets-developer] The Project
Status: Beta
Brought to you by:
cat4hire
From: Ferrari, G. D <gre...@lm...> - 2001-02-14 18:53:13
|
I suggest taking a long hard look at the Gnu model for managing open source with different platforms and versions. It's tried and true, and seems to be working very well. > -----Original Message----- > From: Daryl Beattie [SMTP:Da...@sc...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 1:37 PM > To: 'agl...@li...' > Subject: RE: [Aglets-developer] The Project > > Duh, okay Gregory please ignore my ignorant postings. :P That's what I > get > for reading my e-mails recent-first! Sorry for making a mess of this nice > list already -- I'll control my impulses from now on. :( > > I have a question; is it necessary to continue the aglets1_1 code? We can > always keep it around as the "final IBM release"... but it seems to me > that > this should be a CVS branch-tagged version, not a separate code-base. But > I > suppose we have what we have, and will have to make do. > > It seems like the obvious thing to do is to continue with aglets1_2; iron > it > out and improve it as necessary. > > As for other "versions" of aglets; this is another thing I want to ask > about. How exactly would we maintain all the different ports of aglets > effectively? Right now we are having trouble maintaining ports for Java 1 > and 2! Maybe we could keep the "versions" limited to only different aglet > server implementations. Like a server for Java Micro-Edition or whatever. > These could then all be in the same codebase. [I'm just throwing this out, > feel free to object!] > > It would also be nice to have other front-ends for an aglets server -- > like > a JSP version of the AWT Tahiti (I haven't even looked at the code yet, I > don't know how hard this would be). Besides JSP, there could be Swing, > Applet, ... even proprietary ones like COM, KDE2, etc. > > I second the motion of bringing the 1_2 codebase up to speed. > > Daryl. > > > |