Subject: [ldapext] new version of LDIF: version number

From: Yves Dorfsman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 14:27:19 -0700

The RFC gives only one digit for the version number:

version-number           = 1*DIGIT
                            ; version-number MUST be "1" for the
                            ; LDIF format described in this document.

Looking at different RFC's, it looks like version numbers for protocols, 
file formats etc... just get incremented and don't use a decimal like system 
to separate minor from major update. Is this correct ?

There is only one digit for the version number, should we change that to two 
? OR do we wait for version 7 or 8 before we think about that ?

-- 
Yves.
http://www.sollers.ca/blog

_______________________________________________
Ldapext mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext

---

From: Michael Ströder <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 01:06:27 +0100

Yves Dorfsman wrote:
> file formats etc... just get incremented and don't use a decimal like
> system to separate minor from major update. Is this correct ?
> 
> There is only one digit for the version number, should we change that to
> two ? OR do we wait for version 7 or 8 before we think about that ?

Yes, I also think that the version number has to be bumped up for UTF-8
in LDIF since it means that you cannot transfer LDIF with UTF-8 over
pure-ASCII transportation channels anymore. I'd just increment it per
revision.

Ciao, Michael.