Re: [RFA] Resubmit, reverse debugging [0/5]

Michael Snyder
2008-10-15T18:20:26Z

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 02:58:06PM -0700, Michael Snyder wrote:
>> OK, here's a patch that adds
>> 1) remote protocol documentation
>> 2) The requested extension to the 'T' reply to replace E06
>> 3) A big honking "deprecated" warning for E06.
>
> I'm even fine with the warning being replaced by a comment. The most
> important part, IMO, is having a non-hackish version of the protocol
> implemented and documented.

All right, so that's in.

We also discussed earlier the idea of a capability check,
or like a qSupported message. Are we going to make that a
requirement before this patch can go in? Or can it be added
as a subsequent, incremental improvement?

And are there any more requirements before this patch can go in?