Subject: Re: netatalk in production environments....(RFC)

From: "Tom Watson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 19:07:36 -0800

On Wed, 31 May 2000 18:27:53 -0400 (EDT), [email-masked] wrote:
> 
> If Adrian Sun is really out of the picture, maybe we should grab the
> latest code and start a site on SourceForge for a more collaborative
> development environment...  That would allow the rest of the community to
> contribute code and documentation without having to funnel it through
> Adrian.
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> 	Andy
> 

If "we" were to get a source tree up and running, at least ONE benefit would
be an easier to type/remember version number.  The one now can get a bit
confusing, as it has several "parts".

One area I would be interested in is kernel support for LocalTalk I/O
boards.  I've got a couple of them, and a "resonable" replacement for
the KFP box (that I'm trying to upgrade, unsucessfully at the moment)
would be nice.  Then I could have the Linux box "route" and (later)
supply IP addresses as well (regards to John V.).

p.s.  I'm looking at papd!!
-- 
Tom Watson         Generic short signature
[email-masked]     (I'm at home now)

---

From: Patrik Schindler <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 13:24:59 +0200

At 19:07 Uhr -0800 31.05.2000, Tom Watson wrote:

>boards.

Is already there in 2.2. But see also my message about NBP/routing issue in atalkd.

>Then I could have the Linux box "route" and (later)

On LocalTalk?

:wq! PoC