Re: [soa-iwg] Content of the Eclipse SOA Package

[Scott Lewis <slewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mike Milinkovich wrote:
> > I don't think this
> > should prevent package membership for relevant Eclipse projects (like
> > ECF's work on RFC119).  That just doesn't seem correct to me from a
> > consumer perspective (what these packages are for, no?)
> >     
>
> That is up to the companies involved in the IWG, not I. If they wish to add
> more projects to help them achieve the goals of the group, they can
> certainly do so.
>   

I'm inclined to hope that distribution/packaging decisions would be 
based more on community/consumer interests (i.e. what the runtime 
projects have as available in the SOA space...e.g. RFC119) rather than 
company-specific interests...but systemically/organizationally wouldn't 
it be better to allow those community/consumer interests to at least 
have some say in a working group?

I'm not going to respond any further to this thread until at least 
tomorrow (Friday), just because I'm otherwise occupied today.

Scott