Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [wtp-pmc] Open server adapter contributions

We're essentially at feature cut-off for 1.5, so at this point I think
installable server runtimes are the only option for this release to
preserve stability.

W.r.t. the other question...we have to walk a careful line here. While
we should accept legitimate code contributions from all sources, I
suggest that we also adopt the following policies:

  * Only the organization who owns a logo/trademark can associate it
with a server runtime. This is necessary to protect the rights of the

  * Server runtimes contributed from 3rd parties are identified by the
name of the contributor. E.g.: "Caucho server runtime (contributed by
Gunnar Wagenknecht)". That makes the source clear, and users will be
informed of the source of the runtime.

-----Original Message-----
From: wtp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wtp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Gorkem Ercan
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 2:12 PM
To: wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [wtp-pmc] Open server adapter contributions

I would like to get the PMC opinion on  two server adapter contributions

that are submitted via bugzilla.
The first contribution[ 1] is for Caucho Resin by Gunnar Wagenknecht
The second contribution[2] is for Pramati Server by Navalkumar 

I would like to get the PMC opinion whether if we may continue to 
distribute more server adapters in WTP or we should direct contributors 
and accept these contributions as an installable server adapter.
Also what is our criteria for accepting those contributions ( other than

the technical ones, of course ).For example, To ensure a continuation of

support should we accept contributions from individuals or only from 
that actually develop the servers?


wtp-pmc mailing list

Back to the top