[AFS3-std] Re: rxgk: Version numbers in XDR structures

[Simon Wilkinson]

On 10 Mar 2011, at 15:38, Andrew Deason wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 12:17:52 +0000
> Simon Wilkinson <simon@sxw.org.uk> wrote:
>
>>  4/ Rewrite the challenge definition in terms of either the proposed
>>  new afs-union structure (which seems to me to break abstraction
>>  layers)
>
> This is what I thought would be done in cases like this. What
> abstraction is this breaking? The new type is at the XDR layer, like  
> all
> of the other XDR primitives.

That RX shouldn't have "afs" dependencies. If our intention is that  
afs-union be a new, generic, XDR type, then we need to call it  
something that doesn't have "afs" in the name.

S.