Why not just "teiid"? Leave it to the peripherals to be qualified.
On Jul 14, 2009, at 2:22 PM, John Doyle wrote:
I like teiid-runtime. teiid-engine occurred to me, but I think
runtime is better.
----- "Ramesh Reddy" <rareddy(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> As part of 6.2 release Teiid is will be providing a "Server" kit for
> community. A initial version of this kit is available now!
> The build scripts are modified such that current "embedded" kit can
> be used in multi-purpose mode, where it can support either "embedded"
> mode or standalone server mode.
> The way user invokes the environment defines how the run time is
> 1) If user specifies embedded URL on the connection string, the Teiid
> runtime is loaded into host JVM, and user has Teiid Embedded
> 2) If server is manually started, and then if user uses the Server
> specific URL as the connection string, the client program can connect
> Teiid Server instance over the socket.
> Startup scripts for running the server are provided in the "bin"
> This kit is still under progress and you can monitor it under
. Try it out, give us
> Now, that we have single kit for both Embedded and Server, it is
> confusing to call it "embedded" kit. So, we need to re-name this kit
> something else. Teiid leads would like call this just
> but are open for other suggestions. So, if you have other suggestions
> for name let's hear um?
> teiid-dev mailing list
teiid-dev mailing list