This new flag introduces more ambiguousness for clients.

I think it should either be a GetFailed with reason=Removed (I don't
like this one because the get didn't actually fail, but this depends
on the definition of 'fail'), or a new message
PersistentRequestRemoved. With a new message existing clients also
have no problem because they must ignore the message and the behavior
of fcp2 doesn't change at all for them.

On 2/3/07, NextGen$ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-03 19:23:17]:
>
> > Yeah this is the 3rd possibility *g*. Who will decide this now?
> >
> >
> > On 2/3/07, Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 02:50:51PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > I answered to this in my mail from 2:15pm. It was only my idea to add
> > > > a new message because _I_ thought it is easier for clients this way.
> > > > It is no problem to change the GetFailed message and to provide a
> > > > "reason=removed" to the client.
> > >
> > > Or a Removed=true|false flag.
>
> I would be in favor of the flag solution.
> _______________________________________________
> Devl mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
>
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to