Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto: > On Nov 25, 2007 11:56 AM, Norman Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Am Samstag, den 24.11.2007, 22:58 +0000 schrieb Robert Burrell Donkin: > > <snip> > >>> i'm happy to rename all of them so how about administration for each >>> interface and administrator for each implementation? >>> >>> - robert >> >> +1 > > there seems to be a consensus that this change is positive > > this will rename XYZManagement -> XYZAdministration or > XYZAdministrator (as appropriate). the corresponding avalon roles will > also need to be changed. this will mean that 3.0 configurations will > need to be upgraded. > > is this something that we need to worry about ATM? > > do we need to start recording this somewhere? (where?) > > should be worry about upgrade scripts ATM?
Until the end of the last year I and Norman tried to keep every change config.xml compatible so to have a really simple upgrade for most users (most users don't have custom assembly). At that time we had in the roadmap to release a 2.4 including most of the code that is currently in trunk by keeping config.xml and storage compatibility. If I understand it correctly this change will not affect the config.xml so IMHO it's safe to apply it. It should be limited to assembly.xml, so, it is the same kind of changes we already applied in trunk in past. If we cannot identify *big* advantages in breaking config.xml and storage compatibility I would try to achieve that old compatibility goals for the trunk/3.0. Stefano --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
