That's fine with me... -----Original Message----- From: Ian Springer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 12:56 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: hermes-wsn package redesign?
Yes, for example, for the Nov 2004 WSRF specs, WSRL is draft04, WSRP is draft05, and WSBF is draft03, but they are all part of the Nov 2004 revision of WSRF (i.e. their namespaces all begin with "http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrf/2004/11/";. So I'm thinking in Apollo, Hermes, and Muse, we use the date as the package name, so it's clearer what "goes together". For example: org.apache.ws.resource.lifetime.v2004_11 What do you guys think? Campana Jr., Salvatore J wrote: >I guess we should be consistent with Apollo...Ian keeps talking about >maybe incorportaing the dates instead of the drafts since the dats of >the namespaces are consistent for all the specs, where the drafts are >not always... > >So I'm not sure what to do...As of right now there is nothing in the >1_3 dirs because wsdls didn't change on OASIS > >-----Original Message----- >From: Stefan Lischke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 12:33 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: hermes-wsn package redesign? > >hi, > >I just wanna ask if there will be a package restruction on the wsn >code, like it was done in apollo to allow multiple versions. Or is the >package structure used right now ok (we have 1_2 and 1_3 dirs)? > >thx > >stefan > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
