On 17/01/2016 09:52, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 03:38:00PM +, Robert Wilton wrote:
Since an ID is effectively superseded by any new versions, I think that
it is useful if a module defined in an ID has a revision date that
matches the published ID, and also a
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 03:38:00PM +, Robert Wilton wrote:
>
> Since an ID is effectively superseded by any new versions, I think that
> it is useful if a module defined in an ID has a revision date that
> matches the published ID, and also a reference back to the ID version
> that defines
> On 15 Jan 2016, at 12:49, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 12:39:16PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>>
>> Does this solve any practical problem? Modules are imported based on
>> the module name and revision. On the other hand,
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 12:39:16PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> Does this solve any practical problem? Modules are imported based on
> the module name and revision. On the other hand, it does create new problems:
> namespace URIs and their mappings to prefixes may be spread in many
> places
> On 15 Jan 2016, at 15:16, Andy Bierman wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:39 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> Andy Bierman writes:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 9:32 AM, t.petch wrote:
> >
> >> - Original
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:55 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> > On 15 Jan 2016, at 12:49, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
> j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 12:39:16PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> >>
> >> Does this solve any practical problem?
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 6:19 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> > On 15 Jan 2016, at 15:10, Andy Bierman wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:55 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> >
> > > On 15 Jan 2016, at 12:49, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
>
> On 15 Jan 2016, at 15:10, Andy Bierman wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:55 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> > On 15 Jan 2016, at 12:49, Juergen Schoenwaelder
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:39 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> Andy Bierman writes:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 9:32 AM, t.petch wrote:
> >
> >> - Original Message -
> >> From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder"
> On 15 Jan 2016, at 15:49, Andy Bierman wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 6:19 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
>
> > On 15 Jan 2016, at 15:10, Andy Bierman wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:55 AM, Ladislav Lhotka
On 15/01/2016 15:20, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
On 15 Jan 2016, at 15:49, Andy Bierman wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 6:19 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
On 15 Jan 2016, at 15:10, Andy Bierman wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:55 AM,
- Original Message -
From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder"
To: "Martin Bjorklund"
Cc:
Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 10:48 AM
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:21:43AM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > Juergen Schoenwaelder
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 9:32 AM, t.petch wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder"
> To: "Martin Bjorklund"
> Cc:
> Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 10:48 AM
>
> > On Mon,
Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:15:26AM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Currently, 6087bis says that standards-track, published and
> > unpublished modules SHOULD use the URN prefix
> > "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:".
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:15:26AM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Currently, 6087bis says that standards-track, published and
> unpublished modules SHOULD use the URN prefix
> "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:".
>
> There are two issues with this:
>
> 1. We already publish experimental
Hi,
Currently, 6087bis says that standards-track, published and
unpublished modules SHOULD use the URN prefix
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:".
There are two issues with this:
1. We already publish experimental modules w/ this prefix.
(ietf-netconf-time and ietf-complex-types).
So
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:21:43AM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:15:26AM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Currently, 6087bis says that standards-track, published and
> > >
17 matches
Mail list logo