• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Open source as the way some important software is developed
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Open source as the way some important software is developed


  • Subject: Re: Open source as the way some important software is developed
  • From: Andrus Adamchik <email@hidden>
  • Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:43:22 -0400

If we do re-implement it, why not in Ruby and ride on the buzz? We can call it JetStream. :-) And it is not Java!

That'd be cool.

WebScript/Java/Objective C all worked together in the same environment at one time.

It should be possible to make a backend language pluggable, with HTML, WOD, and the deployment environment supporting any (or a number of) languages. There is Jython (http://www.jython.org/), there is JRuby (http://jruby.codehaus.org/), so this is very possible.

In general the idea to make an opensource, but API compliant WO framework is only in part about helping current users with the legacy code. Another part is opening it up to give it a future.

Andrus


On Aug 17, 2006, at 1:29 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:
On Aug 17, 2006, at 6:37 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:

Obviously I am not a lawyer, and haven't looked in depth in those patents. IIRC they are dealing with ORM, ORM tools, KVC (and what else?) That would affect at least a few dozens if not more of the *existing* open and commercial products. So while there is an issue, I don't think a possible WO port will be in any disadvantage over those other frameworks.

Besides I don't see this as an anti-Apple project. On the contrary, getting Apple on board would be awesome, even if this only means granting the patent rights to a project. This has also been done before by companies like IBM, etc.

Just need to watch for trademark issues - can't have package names starting with "com.apple"; can't call the product WebObjects.

If we do re-implement it, why not in Ruby and ride on the buzz? We can call it JetStream. :-) And it is not Java!


Chuck

--

Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their overall knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific problems. http://www.global-village.net/products/ practical_webobjects

_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: This email sent to email@hidden
  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Open source as the way some important software is developed
      • From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: Open source as the way some important software is developed (From: email@hidden)
 >Re: Open source as the way some important software is developed (From: Andrus Adamchik <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Open source as the way some important software is developed (From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Open source as the way some important software is developed
  • Next by Date: Re: Open source as the way some important software is developed
  • Previous by thread: Re: Open source as the way some important software is developed
  • Next by thread: Re: Open source as the way some important software is developed
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread