> "GSM" == G S Marzot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
GSM> If no one else has a supporting/dissenting opinion on this I
GSM> suppose I will have to defer to the status quo as proposed by wes
GSM> (5.0401)...though this seems over large and over restrictive
GSM> on what libsnmp releases it will
If no one else has a supporting/dissenting opinion on this I suppose I will have
to defer to the status quo as proposed by wes (5.0401)...though this seems
over large and over restrictive on what libsnmp releases it will run with...if
you have an opinion, now might be a good time to share it.
> "TA" == Thomas Anders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TA> Do you have a pointer to it? I vaguely remember this may have just been
TA> some IRC talk between the two of us. I hope I'm wrong.
It might have been on the admin list. I don't have a pointer.
--
Wes Hardaker
Sparta, Inc.
Wes Hardaker wrote:
>> "GSM" == G S Marzot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> GSM> thoughts?
>
> Have you read our previous discussions on the subject? The current
> versioning was actually proposed by me a while back. It is actually
> similar to what you're proposing but a bit more extensive.
Wes Hardaker wrote:
>> "GSM" == G S Marzot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> GSM> thoughts?
>
> Have you read our previous discussions on the subject?
Do you have a pointer to it? I vaguely remember this may have just been
some IRC talk between the two of us. I hope I'm wrong.
+Thomas
--
> "GSM" == G S Marzot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
GSM> thoughts?
Have you read our previous discussions on the subject? The current
versioning was actually proposed by me a while back. It is actually
similar to what you're proposing but a bit more extensive.
In particular, we do match the
The current perl module versioning (5.0301001) seems bit cumbersome and
susceptible to error/confusion - perhaps because I did not find any documented
policy on version compatibility and maintenance and missed previous discussions.
The following is a proposed scheme and policy to simplify and cl
