Re: [Epp-rtk-devel] Fond farwells...

[Rick W. <we...@ar...>]

I'd recomend we use .epp2004. as the package name as EPP-1.0 is mearly a
placeholder for the IETF Standard the curremnt RFC are only Proposed
Standard and there is another revision we must due before we could say
"epp is a standard" and thus have an unqualified package name.

-rick


On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, Michael Schout wrote:

> On Fri, 1 Oct 2004, Daniel Manley wrote:
>
> > or hide the java class packages representing the older EPP versions
> > releases (perhaps going back to plain old "com.tucows.epp.rtk..." with
> > no version marker?).  Finally, I've got a couple of domain names in my
>
> I definately vote that we switch back to the plain "epp" name packages
> (com.tucows.epp.rtk...).  The Afilias 0.9.0 release makes the epp0705
> packages EPP 1.0 compliant.  Unfortunately, .org has not switched to EPP
> 1.0 at this time in production, so we are stuck with the 0.7.5 release
> to interface with .org.  .biz on the other hand already has EPP 1.0
> available.  If the package names are changed to plain "epp", then I
> could run epp-rtk 0.7.5 and the RFC compliant release in the same
> virtual machine.  This would allow us to migrate to EPP 1.0 for .biz,
> and to continue running EPP 07/05 for .org until .org migrates.
>
> Regards,
> Michael Schout
> GKG.NET, Inc.
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal
> Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us
> Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more
> http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl
> _______________________________________________
> Epp-rtk-devel mailing list
> Epp...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/epp-rtk-devel
>