Short-term nALFS roadmap

Neven Has haski at sezampro.yu
Sat Sep 20 05:53:48 PDT 2003

On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 08:22:14AM -0700, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> >The only downside to this that when some installs this new version
> >for the very first time, they would need to remove their existing
> >handlers whereever they have nALFS installed. That's not too
> >convenient, but it'll only happen once, from then on we won't have
> >to change handler naming schemes again.

Yup, the current naming is a mess (I didn't give it too much thinking
at the time).  We also need to consider handlers for the profiles LSB
people use, unless they start using the latest syntax version.

> Possibly with all this stuff that's being added, we could move a 2.0 
> release. If so, that would be an opportune time to make this change.

2.0 as a syntax version 2.0, or nALFS 2.0.0?  The below applies to the
later. :)

nALFS 2.0.0 would be way too high.  Changing that number goes with
something like splitting the program into separate frontend and
backend (just an example), or something in that rank.

But for 1.2.0, I think it would be perfect.  Along with P2 bugs.

BTW, I would like to release 1.1.8 after fixing 668 (--with-ssl not
adding relevant include directory) and 671 (duplicated curl code).

And if more P3 bugs are fixed before P2 ones (and the way Kevin
started working on them, there's a good chance of that happening :),
there is no reason not to release 1.1.9 soon after as well.

Does that sound OK?


More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list