Re: [soa-pmc] Mangrove not in Juno

[<Marc.Gille@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Awesome, Adrian.

 

Let me know if you have questions.

 

Marc

 

From: soa-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:soa-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mos, Adrian
Sent: Donnerstag, 8. Dezember 2011 10:34
To: SOA PMC mailing list
Subject: Re: [soa-pmc] Mangrove not in Juno

 

Hi Marc,

 

This is great news. Looking forward to looking at the modeller code for Mangrove connectivity as soon as I get some time!

 

Adrian.

 

From: soa-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:soa-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marc.Gille@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: mercredi 7 décembre 2011 18:37
To: soa-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [soa-pmc] Mangrove not in Juno

 

Thanks, Adrian.

 

We were actually planning to sign-up for Juno with Stardust. We have 30% of the code (all modeler code) approved and in Github. We will submit the Kernel code for IP check this week and hope to belief in January.

 

Marc

 

From: soa-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:soa-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mos, Adrian
Sent: Mittwoch, 7. Dezember 2011 15:59
To: SOA PMC mailing list
Subject: [soa-pmc] Mangrove not in Juno

 

Hi guys,

 

After considering the pros/cons of signing up Mangrove for Juno, I think that the best option is to skip Juno. The reasons are as follows:

-          The current BPMN editor is being archived

-          The new BPMN editor will not be in Juno

-          Stardust will not be in Juno

-          Engineering are still using the old code-base, I think the migration from STP-IM to Mangrove should be complete before committing to Juno, as there might be changes needed and I don’t know when these would occur

 

Overall I don’t see much value of putting it into Juno now and I’d rather benefit from the freedom of adding and changing stuff to it anytime than be restricted by the Juno code-freeze and so on.

Any thought on this? If there is no strong opinion to pursue Juno for Mangrove, I’ll stick to this idea.

 

Adrian.