Sorry, my apologies, browsermap has been released.

http://devicemap.apache.org/download/



On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Reza Naghibi <[email protected]> wrote:

> So I just want to have a final discussion here before I come to my own
> personal conclusions regarding my role in this project. This way moving
> forward will be more clear.
>
> So it seems like there are 2 project directions being proposed:
>
> One direction, supported by Werner and Bertrand, has this project
> positioned as offering and supporting multiple device detection clients. So
> I like to think of it as a device detection api buffet, a product polyglot
> even. Our users simply choose an option as they see fit. The clients that
> exist are the legacy OpenDDR client (not sure what else to call it since
> there is no official release other than source code in github and apache
> svn), the 1.x Java client released under DeviceMap, a cloned .NET client,
> and Browsermap, a javascript client which I believe is in an un released
> state. Obviously my 2.0 work could fall under this as well.
>
> The other direction, which is the direction I supported, is moving away
> from all the above clients and starting fresh with a 2.0 framework of a
> client specification. The device data would be migrated to pattern domains
> and we would expand to browsers, operating systems, and potentially other
> new domains. The specification will allow for clients to be written and
> tested in a language and domain independent way. All the above clients in
> the first point (OpenDDR, DeviceMap 1.x, browsermap, etc) will no longer be
> supported and users will have to use them as released or migrate to 2.0.
> The same goes for the device data, new work would be on the 2.0 domains and
> no backporting would be planned.
>
> Even if we all come to agreement here, I am not making any promises
> regarding my role moving forward. I just want to have a clear, level headed
> discussion using facts and opinions. If other people here have other views
> or opinions, share them.
>

Reply via email to