I'm good with using the major version, assuming that nothing about the AMI protocol is different within a single major version. Can that really be guaranteed? If not, a protocol version is probably a better way to go, so that connecting applications can adjust their behavior if need be.
<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/4/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Russell Bryant</b> <<a href="mailto:russell@digium.com">russell@digium.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>----- "Olle E Johansson" <<a href="mailto:olle@voop.com">olle@voop.com</a>> wrote:<br>> I got no protests, so my conclusion is that you all are OK with<br>> changing the manager version to 1.1<br>
> and implementing these changes to existing commands in svn trunk<br>> only. Current 1.2 and 1.4 releases<br>> will not change.<br><br>Thanks a lot for the cleanups. I'm sure it will be much appreciated by the users of the manager interface.
<br><br>Regarding the version reported when you first connect, I think that we should just switch the "1.0" to report ASTERISK_VERSION, or maybe just "1.6" in trunk, and whatever the major version is in the future. However, I'm not going to argue too hard either way, since I'd rather hear the opinions from the people that write manager applications.
<br><br>--<br>Russell Bryant<br>Software Engineer<br>Digium, Inc.<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by <a href="http://Easynews.com">Easynews.com</a> --<br><br>asterisk-dev mailing list
<br>To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:<br> <a href="http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev">http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev</a><br></blockquote></div><br>