Hello,
Thanks for the feedback!
On 07/11/2023 09:23, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
> But I think it's looking at the situation from the wrong direction.
[...] we should look at it as an addition to our current list of PQsend
functions for a new packet type. And none of those PQsend functions ever
needed a flag. Which makes sense, because they are the lowest level
building blocks that make sense from a user perspective: They send a
message type over the socket and don't do anything else.
Yes, I think that this is quite close to my thinking when I created the
original version of the patch. Also, the protocol specification states
that the Sync message lacks parameters.
Since there haven't been any comments from the other people who have
chimed in on this e-mail thread, I will assume that there is consensus
(we are doing a U-turn with the implementation approach after all), so
here is the updated version of the patch.
Best wishes,
Anton Kirilov
