Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Protocol recommendations to Thom for Artemis v3 #192

Closed
rjwut opened this issue Feb 7, 2020 · 1 comment
Closed

Protocol recommendations to Thom for Artemis v3 #192

rjwut opened this issue Feb 7, 2020 · 1 comment

Comments

@rjwut
Copy link
Member

rjwut commented Feb 7, 2020

Thom is working on Artemis v3 with a new code base. I would expect that this would also result in a significant overhaul to the protocol. I think it would be good, while Thom is still in the early stages of development, to put a bug in his ear about things we'd like to see him do with the protocol. Let's use this issue to draft a list of requests to Thom with regards to protocol design. Here are some suggestions I have:

  • Publicly release the protocol spec. Having official and complete documentation of the protocol would make it much easier for modders.

  • Semantically version the protocol separately from the Artemis software. People consuming the protocol should be able to be confident that their code will work with any version of the protocol with the same major version number.

  • Decouple enumeration values from their order, and don't rearrange or reuse values. Changing what any enumeration value represents makes things more complicated for people writing code that uses the protocol.

  • Name packet types for what they do, not for their internal format. Future developments may require you to add fields or change their type, making the type name misleading; e.g. valueFourInts.

  • If you significantly change the format of a packet type, deprecate it and create a new packet type instead.

Anything else?

@rjwut
Copy link
Member Author

rjwut commented Feb 10, 2020

@rjwut rjwut closed this as completed Feb 10, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant