On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 09:54:59PM +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote: > On 22.11.2012 00:18, Scott Crosby wrote: > >I think for Frederik's immediate needs, we should add a have a field > >called osmosis_replication_timestamp or osmosis_replication_state = 32, > >which contains a submessage containing a replication timestamp and other > >replication data that he feels is appropriate. > > > >As for the timestamp =18 field, Dennis, what was your intended use of > >this field? Marqqs, what is the intended use of your timestamp > >optional_features field? > > Since nobody has come forward with further requests, may I humbly > suggest that we add three new fields: > > a 64bit integer "osmosis_replication_timestamp" for the replication > timestamp, expressed in seconds since the epoch, otherwise the same > value as in state.txt's "timestamp=..." field;
Why the "osmosis" in there? That seems rather strange to me. Either it is some general thing that works with all programs, then it shouldn't be named after a specific program. Or it is not, then it shouldn't be in a general file standard. Jochen -- Jochen Topf [email protected] http://www.remote.org/jochen/ +49-721-388298 _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
