[OCF]Updates Resource Agent API, Backwards compatibilty

[Ragnar Kjørstad]

On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 04:48:32PM +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> The draft looks reasonably well now.
> 
> Any other comments, wording, phrasing etc?

Section 3.1, second paragraph:
"The major number must be increased if a _backwards incompatible_ change
is made to the API."

What exactly do we mean by backwards incompatibilty?
Do we mean new RM should work with old RA, new RA should work with old
RM, or both?

E.g. adding a new mandatory action would require updates of the RAs. (as
the RM could call them and expect them to be supported). Adding new
possible exit-codes would require updates to the RM, as RAs might return
them and the RM must handle it.

The meaning of backwards compability is also related to who's checking
it. The standard now says: "A major number mismatch between the RA and
the RM must be reported as an error by both sides.".

I read this as if any change that mandates an update in _either_ RM or
RA is an backwards incompatible change, and requires a change in
major-number. Is this the common understanding of this?

I'm fine with that - I just want to make sure we're in agreement.



-- 
Ragnar Kjørstad