On Wed, 2017-11-15 at 05:27 -0500, Joe Clarke wrote: > On 11/15/17 05:06, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > > I suppose my gut reaction to Lou's question as to whether a server > > > should support multiple versions was, "no." A client may have multiple > > > versions loaded to support servers that support different versions. I > > > may be convinced otherwise, but I feel that this will become untenable > > > over time (even if module names change). > > > > There are use cases for modules that are imported (i.e. not > > implemented): it could be that a module author wants to use some > > definitions from an old version of an imported module while, at the same > > time, other definitions from a new version. > > > > The semver-aware "import" statement should be able to deal with this. > > I think it could be, but I also think importing from different versions > of the same module feels messy. How would this work with different > module names today? Just use different prefixes? Are there defined use > cases for this in the wild today?
Let's say a new version of a module adds new enums to two different enumeration types, but an implementor (for some reason) is only able to update one of them in the back-end and not the other. Lada > > Joe > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod -- Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
