my suggestion: move from NT for serious work. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Waters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 9:33 AM Subject: OpenSRS-SF
> I have been trying to get this to work on NT but am having a helluva time > finding the right versions of packages and modules for perl. The automated > install broke miserably but I manually built (with VC6) expat and the > XML::Parser and got a lot of the packages installed but when I verify I get > protocol not supported...from the code this looks like something is wrong > with the XML parser... > > Has anyone got any suggestions or has anyone else gotten this to work on NT? > (docs say it should work fine) > > -bryanw > HalfPriceNames Domain Registry > http://www.halfpricenames.com/ > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of Colin Viebrock > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 10:06 AM > To: Scott Allan > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Client innovation > > > > > 1. Hard cut: make SF official and only "innovate" on that version. This > > > would mean that any new functionality would only be developed by us ion > > > that code base > > > > My choice is this one.d > > I agree. Don't spread your resources thin (but do continue to support the > old > codebase). > > However, I think that there *might* be some issues between the SF developers > and > some RSP developers who contribute patches back to OpenSRS (just read the > archives > for email from Joe Rhett for examples). > > I have no idea what the situation is, nor do I really care too much. But if > OpenSRS > is going to move into a more transparent development system like > SourceForge, you > will need to be prepared for Joe Public offering patches/suggestions/etc.. > Not all > developers work well in this environment. I hope the people working on the > SF client > are ready to deal with this input, both technically and personally. > > - Colin > > > >
