--On Thursday, October 08, 2009 04:32:57 PM -0400 "Matt W. Benjamin"
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Jeff,
What concerns me is the prospect of the XCB draft needing to anticipate
design decisions that should be left to their authors, in their good
time. One of the ways we'll measure the success of our process is that
it can come to closure efficiently on proposals that come before it. It
won't be efficient if we allow time dilation to create entanglements
between proposals that should have been independent.
This is a determination that can and should be made by the group on a
case-by-case basis. What would be the point of defining an "old" XCB, and
then revving all of its RPC's to use 64-bit 100ns time, when in practice
the changes will be deployed at the same time and so no one will ever use
the "old" XCB RPC's?
-- Jeff
_______________________________________________
AFS3-standardization mailing list
[email protected]
http://michigan-openafs-lists.central.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
