updates and fixes would only go into the new package. of course, we'd leave the old packages around. and, of course, maintaining two branches just for naming reasons is out of the question.

we can add a note in README.txt or somesuch and make an announcement at the product's PSC presence. that should do the trick IMHO.


i'm all for bringing stuff like this into the plone namespace.

just my $0.02,

tom

On 01.02.2008, at 12:12, Andreas Zeidler wrote:

On Feb 1, 2008, at 9:51 AM, Alexander Limi wrote:
Just a general question here, while I remember it:
When things like this happen, shouldn't packages be renamed to plone.localrole instead of borg.localrole?

hmm, i'm not sure. it would surely lessen confusion, but otoh a lot of packages (and buildouts for that matter) depend on that package, so changing the name would cause quite a bit of migration headaches. of course it'd be possible to leave the old version around for a while, but what about updates and fixes? and maintaining another branch just because of this seems a bit too much, imho.

cheers,


andi

--
zeidler it consulting - http://zitc.de/ - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
friedelstra├če 31 - 12047 berlin - telefon +49 30 25563779
pgp key at http://zitc.de/pgp - http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net/
plone 3.0.5 released! -- http://plone.org/products/plone

_______________________________________________
Framework-Team mailing list
Framework-Team@lists.plone.org
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team


_______________________________________________
Framework-Team mailing list
Framework-Team@lists.plone.org
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team

Reply via email to