<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: RE: Why Standardize BeanShell and Groovy?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://almaer.com/blog/re-why-standardize-beanshell-and-groovy/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://almaer.com/blog/re-why-standardize-beanshell-and-groovy</link>
	<description>blogging about life, the universe, and everything tech</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2012 07:06:53 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Bitter</title>
		<link>http://almaer.com/blog/re-why-standardize-beanshell-and-groovy/comment-page-1#comment-23493</link>
		<dc:creator>Bitter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2005 02:30:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://almaer.com/blog2/re-why-standardize-beanshell-and-groovy#comment-23493</guid>
		<description>Bob, do you really think the Beanshell project should jump through JCP hoops just to be more appealing to users stupid enough to ignore it for want of a JSR number?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob, do you really think the Beanshell project should jump through JCP hoops just to be more appealing to users stupid enough to ignore it for want of a JSR number?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Spille</title>
		<link>http://almaer.com/blog/re-why-standardize-beanshell-and-groovy/comment-page-1#comment-23492</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Spille</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2005 21:24:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://almaer.com/blog2/re-why-standardize-beanshell-and-groovy#comment-23492</guid>
		<description>I question whether the JCP is all that meaningful anymore.  Do companies really slavishly look to see a JSR seal of approval on stuff today?  Not from where I sit.  All a JSR really means is whatever a bunch of self-appointed experts can sneak past JCP reps from Oracle, IBM, Sun, and BEA.

I just don&#039;t think that the JCP is a &quot;standards body&quot; that any sane company really cares about.

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I question whether the JCP is all that meaningful anymore.  Do companies really slavishly look to see a JSR seal of approval on stuff today?  Not from where I sit.  All a JSR really means is whatever a bunch of self-appointed experts can sneak past JCP reps from Oracle, IBM, Sun, and BEA.</p>
<p>I just don&#8217;t think that the JCP is a &#8220;standards body&#8221; that any sane company really cares about.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Lee</title>
		<link>http://almaer.com/blog/re-why-standardize-beanshell-and-groovy/comment-page-1#comment-23491</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Lee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2005 01:27:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://almaer.com/blog2/re-why-standardize-beanshell-and-groovy#comment-23491</guid>
		<description>There are multiple parties involved. This JSR is coming along very late in the process. BeanShell isn&#039;t changing much if at all (mixins would be nice ;)).  BeanShell is already very useable and useful. As Richard said, a JSR will give BeanShell the seal of approval it needs for mass adoption.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are multiple parties involved. This JSR is coming along very late in the process. BeanShell isn&#8217;t changing much if at all (mixins would be nice ;)).  BeanShell is already very useable and useful. As Richard said, a JSR will give BeanShell the seal of approval it needs for mass adoption.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
