In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Christopher Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, one thing that I would like to question is whether we really need to
> break backwars compatibility for this change at all.
>
> Based on my reading, there is only one aspect of the changes in the API
> that forces backwards incompabitibility: the requirement for the client
> to generate a changeset before uploading and provide that changeset
> identifier.
>
> Now, based on my reading of this, (which could be wrong), if that's the
> only change, there is a way to simply allow 0.5 API clients continue to
> work: If a changeset identifier is not provided, then create a changeset
> automatically.
It isn't the changesets that forced the version change because
you're quite right that we could create implicit changesets if
the client didn't create one.
What sealed it I think was when we decided to make clients indicate
what version of the object that had when making a change, so that the
server could reject the change if the object had been changed since
that client last downloaded.
Tom
--
Tom Hughes ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://www.compton.nu/
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
