ietf-nntp Three proposals

[Petter Nilsen]

In article <32B0F363.799A at netscape.com>, bhern at netscape.com (Brian Hernacki)
wrote:

> It does seem a bit silly to rename and bust clients...or even encourgae
> folks to develop implementations that would bust existing clients (what
> I think will happen if we rename). But if we allow X-commands to become
> "real"..then we might as well scrap the idea of X-commands being "local"
> or "experimental". It shoudl be one way or ther other.

How about just keeping XOVER as an alias for OVER (same with other commands),
and encourage the use of the new non-X variants. If it is stated clearly that
this is an exception to the general rule for keeping backwards compatibility,

---
\\\\\\  Petter Nilsen - IRC #amiga: Mitchman  -  pettern at icenet.no |\
 >>>>>>============================================================| >
//////   THOR Team Coordinator - http://thule.icenet.no/~pettern/  |/

STICK \'stik\ n. 1: A boomerang that doesn't work.