[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Nbd] More efficient treatment of experimental protocol extensions



On 16 Apr 2016, at 18:30, Alex Bligh <alex@...872...> wrote:

>>> 
>>> I'm interested in confirmation that this approach works for people.
>> 
>> Sure does.
> 
> Great. As you can see I've done the structured replies extension too
> now.
> 
>> Detail: might be an idea to retain the "extensions" section, but have it
>> just be links to the specs and a one- or two-sentence description of
>> what they entail?
> 
> That was exactly what I planned to do, plus some text about how
> to propose new extensions (email this list) and how they get
> incorporated (discussion on list, preferably code in the
> reference implementation, preferably demonstrable interworking
> with other implementations).

I have now applied this.

* master now has no extensions in

* There are three branches: extension-info, extension-write-zeroes
  and extension-structured-reply which cover the three extensions.

Please provide further changes to extensions as patches against
the relevant branch, rather than against master.

-- 
Alex Bligh







Reply to: