Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

NEW-PROTOCOL: document what needs to be done to add one #6263

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

bagder
Copy link
Member

@bagder bagder commented Nov 28, 2020

No description provided.

@bagder bagder self-assigned this Nov 28, 2020
@dfandrich
Copy link
Collaborator

@dfandrich dfandrich commented Nov 28, 2020

@bagder
Copy link
Member Author

@bagder bagder commented Nov 29, 2020

I hear you, but that's a tough one to put into words. How about adding a small section like this?


Wide and public use

The protocol shall already be used or have an expectation of getting used widely. Experimental protocols are better off worked on in experiments first, to prove themselves before they are adopted by curl.

## Documentation

We cannot assume that users are particularly familiar with specific details
and peculiarities of the protocol. It needs documentation.
Copy link
Member

@danielgustafsson danielgustafsson Nov 30, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

On top of the curl documentation for the protocol, there should IMO be published documentation of the protocol itself licensed in a way which is freely available without an NDA etc.

Copy link
Member Author

@bagder bagder Dec 1, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll add something about that!


The protocol shall already be used or have an expectation of getting used
widely. Experimental protocols are better off worked on in experiments first,
to prove themselves before they are adopted by curl.
Copy link
Member

@danielgustafsson danielgustafsson Nov 30, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There should be at least one maintained server implementation which is in a (non-alpha/beta) production release?

Copy link
Member Author

@bagder bagder Nov 30, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That would rule out early work on HTTP/3, if we would consider that a "new protocol". I added that "expectation" thing with protocols like that in mind.

My only concern with writing too many "shoulds" is that people will single out individual ones and use those as "see, they don't want support for our protocol because..." when we rather want to judge a new protocol based on "the full picture" and not throw anything out simply because maybe strictly speaking they don't fulfill an individual "should" mentioned in this document.

Copy link
Member

@danielgustafsson danielgustafsson Nov 30, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good point.

@@ -74,6 +74,7 @@ EXTRA_DIST = \
KNOWN_BUGS \
MAIL-ETIQUETTE \
MQTT.md \
NEW-PROTOCOL.md \
Copy link
Member

@danielgustafsson danielgustafsson Nov 30, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Curiosity killed the cat, why do we use all-caps for (most) documentation filenames? Legacy?

Copy link
Member Author

@bagder bagder Nov 30, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Plain legacy and old habits... maybe I should rather break that off right now and do lower case here!

@bagder bagder deleted the bagder/new-protocol branch Dec 1, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants