... and one person's religion is another person's snake oil.

Personally, I'd prefer that those who like *nix run *nix, and those 
comfortable with NT run that -- and Mr. Dean doesn't have to worry about me 
trying to convince him to run NT.  I know there is more than one way to make 
this work.

On topic: I seem to remember that I had to upgrade ActiveState PERL to run 
the current client, and that did include XML::Parser....  I'll go collect up 
version numbers if that isn't enough info...

-- Lynn

-----Original Message-----
From:   Michael L. Dean
Sent:   Thursday, November 15, 2001 12:16 PM
To:     Bryan Waters; Lynn W. Taylor; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:        RE: OpenSRS-SF

please refer to opensrs first in your to: emails so that I don't get these
trivial emails in my main window.  It is getting tiresome.  Better yet,
reply strictly to Lynn, et al ad infinitum so that I don't even get your
junk in my delete window.  Realizing of course, that like garage sales, one
person's junk is another's precious jewel.  Perhaps you will find my
perception of your monumental missives persuasive in the future and remain
totally silent!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryan Waters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Lynn W. Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 11:40 AM
Subject: RE: OpenSRS-SF


> Thanks for the assist...the XML::Parser module is missing on Eric's
> site...it is not used for the current version from the OpenSRS site.  I am
> anxious to try out the billing code on the new stuff as well as integrate
my
> enhancements using hooks so that I don't fall victim to the need to
> constantly redo all my changes every time a new version is
released...other
> than those things, I too am happy with the current version.  But my
billing
> system does need work and it seemed like a better investment of my time to
> upgrade and use the version coming out instead of reinventing everything
the
> next time we are forced to upgrade by significant enhancements/bug fixes,
> etc.
>
> Anyway...thanks for all the help...if(when) I get it working I will
> contribute my 2cents as well...:)
>
> -bryanw
> HalfPriceNames Domain Registry
> http://www.halfpricenames.com/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lynn W. Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 12:35 PM
> To: Bryan Waters; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: OpenSRS-SF
>
>
> Bryan,
>
> Eric has the appropriate modules already compiled -- he gave the URL in an
> earlier message.  I think he's mentioned the SourceForge version as well.
>
> I'm sure he'd like to know if any were missing.
>
> We're in no great rush to get on the SourceForge version as I don't think
it
> adds much at this point, so I can't comment on it directly.
>
> -- Lynn
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bryan Waters
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 11:28 AM
> To: Lynn W. Taylor; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: OpenSRS-SF
>
> Nope...missed the question.
>
> I'm running my entire site on NT using OpenSRS...i'm talking about the
> SourceForge version which is the next generation of OpenSRS...i'm trying
to
> upgrade.  I have used Eric's site to great advantage in getting my current
> site up and running quickly.
>
> Thanks though...
>
> -bryanw
> HalfPriceNames Domain Registry
> http://www.halfpricenames.com/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Lynn W. Taylor
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 11:59 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: OpenSRS-SF
>
>
> I'm sure those who are successfully running NT will disagree.
>
> OpenSRS runs fine on NT.  The appropriate documentation is at
> http://www.atlcon.net/opensrs -- Eric Longman has done a great job keeping
> all of this current, and keeping the appropriate perl modules in PPM
format
> (so you don't have to build them).
>
> -- Lynn
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael L. Dean
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 10:44 AM
> To: Bryan Waters; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: OpenSRS-SF
>
> my suggestion: move from NT for serious work.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bryan Waters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 9:33 AM
> Subject: OpenSRS-SF
>
>
> > I have been trying to get this to work on NT but am having a helluva
time
> > finding the right versions of packages and modules for perl.  The
> automated
> > install broke miserably but I manually built (with VC6) expat and the
> > XML::Parser and got a lot of the packages installed but when I verify I
> get
> > protocol not supported...from the code this looks like something is
wrong
> > with the XML parser...
> >
> > Has anyone got any suggestions or has anyone else gotten this to work on
> NT?
> > (docs say it should work fine)
> >
> > -bryanw
> > HalfPriceNames Domain Registry
> > http://www.halfpricenames.com/
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> > Behalf Of Colin Viebrock
> > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 10:06 AM
> > To: Scott Allan
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Client innovation
> >
> >
> > > > 1. Hard cut: make SF official and only "innovate" on that version.
> This
> > > > would mean that any new functionality would only be developed by us
> ion
> > > > that code base
> > >
> > > My choice is this one.d
> >
> > I agree.  Don't spread your resources thin (but do continue to support
the
> > old
> > codebase).
> >
> > However, I think that there *might* be some issues between the SF
> developers
> > and
> > some RSP developers who contribute patches back to OpenSRS (just read
the
> > archives
> > for email from Joe Rhett for examples).
> >
> > I have no idea what the situation is, nor do I really care too much.
But
> if
> > OpenSRS
> > is going to move into a more transparent development system like
> > SourceForge, you
> > will need to be prepared for Joe Public offering
patches/suggestions/etc..
> > Not all
> > developers work well in this environment.  I hope the people working on
> the
> > SF client
> > are ready to deal with this input, both technically and personally.
> >
> > - Colin
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Reply via email to