Re: [Mathmesh] Lets get started

Michael Richardson <> Wed, 14 August 2019 23:54 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2CB9120917 for <>; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 16:54:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AeuY3iEJzEgx for <>; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 16:54:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 489A4120901 for <>; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 16:54:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C51B63818C; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 19:54:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE9A9A8A; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 19:54:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 19:54:55 -0400
Message-ID: <721.1565826895@localhost>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Mathmesh] Lets get started
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 23:54:59 -0000

Phillip Hallam-Baker <>; wrote:
    > One of my greatest disappointments on the Web was that by the time Tim
    > assembled to team at CERN to fix HTTP, the exponent had already kicked in
    > and we were prisoners of the user base. So I have been holding off
    > deployment until at least I was happy with the way the system worked
    > together. This is now the third major redesign.

    > We will have to have some users before we can be sure we have a useful
    > spec. And having users does not mean we can't make breaking changes but we
    > will at least have to give them an upgrade path. So if anyone has a big
    > idea that is going to cause breaking changes, if they propose it now, there
    > will be no need for an upgrade plan which will make it simpler.

I agree. We need running code to figure out if it works.
So, a critical thing is to figure out what code should do when it sees
version > expected-version.

Michael Richardson <>;, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-