[AFS3-std] Re: RxOSD claim on 2 structure members

[Simon Wilkinson]

On 15 Jun 2009, at 17:04, Jeffrey Altman wrote:

> It does not hurt to know what people are looking for.   A
> A requirement should specify:
>
>   1. the affected package
>   2. type and description of required value
>   3. how it will be used
>   4. a list of affected RPCs

As per my original suggestion, I also believe that a requirement  
should specify the behaviour of the modified RPC in the event that the  
backend code changes required to support it have not yet been  
implemented. Given we're potentially batching up a lot of RPC changes  
into single revisions, I think this is going to be important.

S.