If you're creating a new protocol that is not just a simple iteration of the binary protocol, I'd recommend at least changing the major version number, and probably just coming up with your own identifying signature altogether. The version numbers in the binary protocol are intended to be for future iterations of that specific protocol, which should ideally be backwards-compatible.
It sounds like your protocol is not intended to be a development iteration on the BinaryProtocol, but rather a different protocol built on top of it. -----Original Message----- From: Beth Trushkowsky [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2009 12:11 PM To: [email protected] Subject: version number for new thrift protocol I'm written a new thrift protocol that extends the binary protocol. Is there a convention for choosing an appropriate protocol version number?
