shale-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Craig McClanahan" <>
Subject Re: Should we move shale-petstore somewhere else? Was --> Re: Wikipedia: More Licensing Questions
Date Thu, 03 Aug 2006 18:34:35 GMT
On 8/3/06, Sean Schofield <> wrote:
> I'm considering an option that Craig mentioned earlier - moving this
> to google's new open source area.  While I understand the reasons for
> the tight restrictions that ASF has, it makes it difficult to host a
> fully functional sample app using several different technologies.
> On google (and presumably, we can also distribute
> binaries wither hibernate, etc.  That will allow more people to use
> the app.  No matter how easy you make it, some people are just putoff
> by compiling their own source.  I admit, sometimes I fall into this
> category (if my interest is only casual.)

One other potential benefit of a "goodies" project somewhere else would be
the ease of incorporating new developers -- we can be as free as we would
like with commit rights to a goodies area, and be able to observe actual
behavior before potentially extending an invitation to join the framework
project itself.

If we do move it, I'd still like some loose integration between shale
> and this project.  This would include links to the shale-petstore from
> the shale site and referring people on the user list to the
> shale-petstore when it serves as an appropriate example.

I'd definitely be OK with having an "affiliation" relationship from the
Shale website itself.  This would be somewhat analogous to what Struts does
with a corresponding SourceForge project[1], for a lot of the same reasons.


+1 on doing this.




  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message