Joe Hildebrand wrote: > > On Nov 20, 2007, at 12:38 PM, Rachel Blackman wrote: > >> I.e., I think this method is kind of a mess, when just adding 'hash' >> in separately would've solved the backwards compatibility issue >> nicely. However, that ship has probably sailed, so even just >> including 'v' will solve the 'users will ask for this' concern I had >> about displaying version strings. :) > > > And then new clients would need to respond to both new-style queries and > old-style queries, as well as continuing to send ext for > backward-compatibility. > > I agree that it's unfortunate that old clients will show the hash as the > version number. Like stpeter said, though, I'm not convinced that the > version number has general-purpose utility.
I'm not either, but if 'v' is optional and end users love it then I have no objections. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
