[Dev] Intgra protocol specification

[henrikfr]

Hello,

> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 18:30 +0100, Alexander Refsum Jensenius wrote:
> > Hola,
> > 
> > On 5. feb. 2007, at 14.50, Jamie Bullock wrote:
> > > I think we urgently need a working protocol document that clarifies  
> > > conclusively the current status of the protocol,
> > ...
> > > but it does need to be definitive: "version 1.0".
> > 
> > I see the need for pushing things forward, but I am very sceptical  
> > about moving what I see as a rough draft to a "version 1.0" without  
> > having really evaluated what we already have and discussed the  
> > different implementations that have been made by the various centres.
> >
> > I suggest moving on to v0.2 and start getting feedback from everyone  
> > about the current state of affairs before we think about making it  
> > definitive.
> > 
> 
> Personally, I think the protocol has now been debated enough times for
> us to know what the key issues are; we just need to make some decisions
> about them, and commit to paper.
> 
> However, if people feel that we are not yet ready for v1.0, then I would
> be happy to support the production of a lower version. To me the most
> important thing is that we have a versioned protocol document that
> accurately reflects the current status of our thinking. We need this
> asap as a point of reference for further discussion and development.
> 
> Jamie

I agree with Jamie here. We risk at (again) having to debate things that have already been decided upon if we don't have an updated protocol document.

/Henrik