[Dspace-general] DSpace Position Paper - HP Labs (fwd)

[Tom De Mulder]

I sent the mail below to DSpace-tech, but I thought it might be useful to
post here, too, since I think quite a few people here work at institutions
that are using DSpace 1.2 and might be worried about a sudden switch to
2.0 architecture leaving the 1.x branch behind.

I'd personally most like to hear MacKenzie's viewpoint on this - what's
MIT's stance?

--
Tom De Mulder <tdm27 at cam.ac.uk> - Cambridge University Computing Service
                   New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QH
-> 29/07/2004 : The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (72% of Full)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:20:53 +0100 (BST)
From: Tom De Mulder <tdm27 at cam.ac.uk>
To: dspace-tech <dspace-tech at lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: DSpace Position Paper - HP Labs

Hello all (and esp. Rob and the folks at MIT),

I was reading HP's Position Paper (http://wiki.dspace.org/index.php/HpPositionPaper)
and noticed the following:

"We believe all of the above goals are best served by concentrating on
moving DSpace to the proposed 'version 2.0' architecture as soon as
possible. This is where our efforts will henceforth be focussed."

Does this mean that the 1.x branch won't be further developed by HP? What
about bug fixes and feature requests?

--
Tom De Mulder <tdm27 at cam.ac.uk> - Cambridge University Computing Service
                   New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QH
-> 28/07/2004 : The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (64% of Full)