On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 7:44 AM, Paul F Fraser via osgi-dev < osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org> wrote:
> Any opinions on how we should refer to the two versions? > > Perhaps "enRoute" for the new and "Classic enRoute" for the original. > This is my preference. A lot of "Classic" enRoute informed the OSGi R7 spec and was adopted into the spec, making it possible to substantially slim down enRoute itself. However R7 is not fully released yet (some bits of Enterprise are still in progress) so we are in an awkward transition phase. > > Or enroute1 and enRoute2? > This would be confusing since "Classic enRoute" had a version 2 :-) > > Or is there a formal naming? > The name of the project is formally just enRoute. > > Paul Fraser > > _______________________________________________ > OSGi Developer Mail List > osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org > https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev >
_______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
