← Back to team overview

hipl-core team mailing list archive

Re: [Question #123357]: Guidelines for the inclusion of extensions


Question #123357 on HIPL changed:

Miika Kari Tapio Komu posted a new comment:
Nice text, Rene. Overall ok, but few clarifications.

At the moment, the definition of an extension is probably closer to:

- Any functionality that is not stated as mandatory in RFC5201, RFC5203
or RFC5204.

(As tinyhip modularization didn't cover registration and RVS)

I agree on the properties. I agree also on the extensions that should
can go into the trunk, but I would add one thing. Internal extensions,
such as a GUI or support for platform XYZ, that do not affect
interoperability should be ok as long as they meet the other criteria
you stated.

You received this question notification because you are a member of HIPL
core team, which is an answer contact for HIPL.