On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 17:20 +1100, Brett Nash wrote:
> Hello All,
> 
> > >   One thing I'd really like to see added is better documentation on
> > > failure messages - in particular for each command what type of failures
> > > we can expect.  Some errors would be universal, but some need to listed
> > > that they can occur.
> > 
> > I've added a few descriptions of what I think the error messages should
> > be used for. They are probably a bit wishy-washy so feel free to pick on
> > them.
> 
> Just they are backwards - the errors that each request can return should
> be listed.  You can ignore the ones that can be on any case.

Okay, I think we should add this information.

> > >   I think it may be nice to add an extra info field for each failure too.
> > > General reference may do it.  But may be overkill, and may not cover all
> > > cases.
> > 
> > It may be overkill, can you think of any cases it may not handle?
> 
> A ref to invalid object is kinda weird.  Also references to "why this
> packet is wrong" are quite weird.  Also you may want to reference what
> the type of the message was that was incorrect (rather then the client
> trying to dig through to find out which message was which reference).

Did we ever come up with a good solution for this problem?

<snip>

Tim 'Mithro' Ansell

_______________________________________________
tp-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.thousandparsec.net/tp/mailman.php/listinfo/tp-devel

Reply via email to