[Box Backup] Release Candidate 3

[Martin Ebourne]

On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 17:40 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Hi Ben,
> 
> On Sun, 19 Feb 2006, Ben Summers wrote:
> 
> > I "broke" backwards compatibility by bumping the protocol number 
> > because...
> >
> > * A 0.10 server will appear talk to a 0.09 server just fine.
> 
> Sorry, what I meant was, is there no way that the server can be made to 
> accept clients with a protocol version older than the highest one it 
> supports, if there are no backwards-incompatible changes in the protocol, 
> as is the case here?
> 
> Forcing the server and client protocol versions to match exactly, while 
> conservative, is a real pain for server operators and users, IMHO.

I agree that we should try and address this. Really it must be possible
to upgrade one end without the other. Possibly not either way round, it
would be ok for instance if the server always had to be >= the client.

Not sure how the protocol works, but if the client sends its version to
the server, maybe the server could respond with the same version if and
only if it can offer compatibility. Otherwise it responds with its own
version.

This doesn't sound like something we can address this time round though.

Cheers,

Martin.