At 12:19 AM 10/31/2001, Stephen Adkins wrote: >At 08:31 PM 10/30/2001 +0800, Gunther Birznieks wrote: > >At 12:08 AM 10/30/2001, Stephen Adkins wrote: > >>At 05:36 PM 10/28/2001 +0200, Robin Berjon wrote: > >> >On Sunday 28 October 2001 15:58, Gunther Birznieks wrote: >... > >>I propose that both of these visions are compatible with some vocabulary > >>such as the following. > >> > >> * P5EE - any extensions (doc+code) that promote the development, > >> deployment, and acceptance of Enterprise Systems written in Perl > >> (i.e. the P5EE aegis covers both of the following) > >> * P5EE Core Modules - (Limited/Standardized vision) the set of core > >> modules widely agreed on my Enterprise Perl Developers that are a > >> part of Enterprise Perl Systems. > >> * P5EE Blueprints - (Expansive/Diverse vision) (note the parallel to the > >> concept of the J2EE Blueprint, http://java.sun.com/j2ee/download.html) > >> Details describing good ways of implementing Enterprise Perl Systems > >> on top of P5EE Core Modules. (May include many more details than > >> are strictly relevant to Perl.) > >> * P5EE Optional Modules - (bridge between the two) sets of modules > >> which are part P5EE Blueprints which are beyond the P5EE Core Modules. > > > >Tentatively I think this is reasonable... Which of the above would be the > >equivalent of P5EE-Enabled that I mentioned before and that you referenced > >above? > >I think that my "P5EE Blueprints" are essentially your "P5EE-enabled" >solutions.
Well, that makes sense from a documentation perspective, but I was under the impression that what I would term P5EE-Enabled (eg templates) would actually fall into one of the above categories. I see 3 that you've listed but I am not sure: extensions, core, optional.... Perhaps if you gave an example of what the above 4 would encapsulate?
