Re: [Epp-rtk-devel] Regarding the package name issue

[janusz <ja...@ca...>]

Asbjorn,
I assume that you are proposing using "epp-ps" for "proposed standard 
and "epp" for "STANDARD".

If this is the case then I don't see this naming proposal much different 
than Rick Wesson's proposal.

All the issues that were raised so far are valid.

Regards,

Janusz Sienkiewicz


Asbjorn S Mikkelsen wrote:

>Hi,
>
>what about calling it "epp-ps" or something similar to show that it is
>"proposed standard"?
>
>Asbjorn
>
>
>On Mon, 2004-10-18 at 17:17, janusz wrote:
>  
>
>>Michael Schout wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>The 0.9.0 release has the all of exising package names (epp02, epp0402,
>>>epp0503 etc).  But the epp0705 package is really EPP 1.0, not EPP 07/05.
>>>This makes it impossible to run the 0.9.0 release with a EPP 1.0
>>>registry and with .org (07/05) in the same JVM.  We are not proposing
>>>removing any of the packages.  I was proposing to revert the epp0705
>>>package to EPP 07/05, and add a NEW package for EPP 1.0.  All of the
>>>existing packages would remain (for now at least).
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Existing state of 0.9.0 requires correction. I don't think there is any 
>>need for discussion on that.
>>
>>epp0705 should work with EPP 7/5.
>>There should be a new package to run EPP 1.0.
>>
>>The discussion is about what naming convention should be aplied to EPP 
>>1.0 package now and in the future when EPP moves from "proposed 
>>standard" to "STANDARD".
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Janusz
>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>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
>>    
>>