[zeromq-dev] Behavior of Labels, Identities, and Socket Types in 3.0

[Michel Pelletier]

Another option: I'm willing to put in an hour or so a few times a week
to fork the guide and bring it up to the 3.0 protocol.  I guessing
this wouldn't take more than a couple weeks of time.  This will help
bring me up to speed as well.  It would mean some work for the experts
though, fielding my questions and reviewing my changes.

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 7:09 AM, Martin Sustrik <sustrik at 250bpm.com> wrote:
> On 10/27/2011 03:19 PM, AJ Lewis wrote:
>
>>> So, please, if you are using labels and you mind about reverting back
>>> to 2.1-style protocol, shout now!
>>
>> Is there a strong reason to not move forward with the new label
>> protocol in 3.0?  It seems like it's had reasonable support on the list
>> (the main complaint has been consistency AFAICS).  Would it be a bunch
>> of work to make things consistent using the new label model?
>>
>> I've not dug into the 3.0 model extensively, but it makes sense to me to
>> split the envelopes out of the data parts of the message and put them
>> into the protocol itself.
>
> The current codebase is somewhere on the halfway between old system
> based on multi-part messages alone and a system using labels consistently.
>
> AFAIU this is causing problems with usability of 3.0, issues like
> "example X in guild is written for version 2.1 but it doesn't work with
> 3.0" etc.
>
> That's why I proposed reverting to old behaviour.
>
> If people are happy with existing 3.0 behaviour, all it means is less
> work for me :)
>
> Martin
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
>