ADC and the new clothes

Site Announcements
Pretorian
Site Admin
Posts: 214
Joined: 21 Jul 2009, 10:21

Re: ADC and the new clothes

Post by Pretorian » 12 Aug 2009, 17:14

Great suggestions. My only concern is how to deal with existing implementations?

Pretorian
Site Admin
Posts: 214
Joined: 21 Jul 2009, 10:21

Re: ADC and the new clothes

Post by Pretorian » 12 Aug 2009, 20:13

Having thought some regarding the SUP; instead there should be a protocol version for every feature. That is;
SUP ('AD' | 'RM') feature / protocol (separator ('AD' | 'RM') feature / protocol)*
where protocol is (say) major.minor
That way we can completely control and know which version of all features everyone is using. To keep some backwards compatibilty, all features that are "1.0" can omit the protocol version.

Dj_Offset
Member
Posts: 53
Joined: 15 Sep 2008, 21:48
Location: adcs://adcs.uhub.org:1511
Contact:

Re: ADC and the new clothes

Post by Dj_Offset » 12 Aug 2009, 20:55

Pretorian wrote:
Great suggestions. My only concern is how to deal with existing implementations?
My point exactly too, which is why i proposed it years ago when we broke the protocol after all...

Pietry
Senior Member
Posts: 328
Joined: 04 Dec 2007, 07:25
Location: Bucharest
Contact:

Re: ADC and the new clothes

Post by Pietry » 13 Aug 2009, 07:07

Pretorian: The official ADC specification means BASE + official extensions ( at least that's what I ment ). And what do you think about the versioning of the protocol ? ( 1.0.1 versus 1.1 )
Just someone

Locked