[standards-jig] Re: reference implementation? (was: Re: [rpc-jig] JEP-0009)

Daniel Veillard veillard at redhat.com
Tue Jan 22 23:23:39 UTC 2002


On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 04:28:59PM -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > First it's not available (yet) second the concept of reference implementation
> > is IMHO screwed beyond repair. You want to check interoperability but certainly
> > not become a "reference implementation", well I wouldn't like it, it's 
> > a maintainance nightmare.
> 
> Did I say "reference implementation".

  Yes, twice this week :-)

> I think the JEP process only refers
> to an implementation, not a reference implementation.
> 
> /me checks http://foundation.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0001.html
> 
> Well, actually it refers to "reference implementation" but I'm not sure
> whether that's really what we want or need in order to accept a standard
> as Final.

  No what you really want is at least 2 or 3 interoperable implementations
for every features in the protocol. That's the IETF rule. I would like
to also see a rule like one of them at least being opensource.

> I'm cross-posting the standards-jig on this, since the topic is wider than
> just RPC.

  <grin/> yet another list ....

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
veillard at redhat.com  | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/



More information about the Standards mailing list