On 29. mars 2011, at 19.54, Brian Aker wrote: > One thing that I am noticing in the memcached 1.6 tree is that there are > some protocol additions that have not been documented, and there are zero > emails to any of the mailing list about them. Personally I think it is bad > business to see that stuff going into 1.6. If "memcached" is supposed to be > the reference implementation, then there needs to be code in the server > showing how these features work.
The idea with the engine interface was that we should be able to extend the engines with "private" commands. I created some that users needed for their environments and some just to see that they're possible. That being said, we haven't released 1.6 yet and nothing is written in stone. The new proposed commands _will_ get better documentation, and we may discuss the actual format (and possibly drop them (or move them to the "private" command range)). I don't see it as that big problem that we've got an actual implementation we may discuss, instead of sitting down discussing every tiny little bit up front. We did that for the rget commands, and AFAIK no one has ever provided an implementation for those commands. Cheers, Trond
