The AT protocol is the most obtuse crock of s*

Re:The AT protocol is the most obtuse crock of s* by vidarh on Wednesday May 10, 2023 @03:46AM (#35884794)

If they'd proposed (or even just implemented) improvements that at least suggested they'd considered existing options and wanted to try to maximise the ability to do interop (even with proxies), I'd have been more sympathetic. But AT to mean seems to be a big ball of Not Invented Here that makes me worry that either they didn't care and try, or that they choice to make interop worse for a non-technical reason.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The AT protocol is the most obtuse crock of s* by detourdog on Wednesday May 10, 2023 @07:15AM (#35885880)

During this stage of discovery I'm completely comfortable with ground up rethinks.

I don't feel we have the correct solution and there is no commercial reason to ge this thing shipped. Now is the time to explore all the possibilities.

Once we have explored the problem space we should graft the best bits together for a final solution, if needed.

I'm not sure I see the value of standardizing on a single protocol. Multiple protocols can access the same data store. Adopting one protocol doesn't preclude other protocols. I believe Developers should adopt all the protocols.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The AT protocol is the most obtuse crock of s* by vidarh on Wednesday May 10, 2023 @08:43AM (#35886500)

Ground up rethinks that takes into account whether or not there's an actual reason to make a change is good. Ground up rethinks that throws things away for the sake of throwing them away even what they end up doing would layer cleanly are not. They're at best lazy. At worst intentional attempts at diluting effort. I'm hoping they've only been lazy.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The AT protocol is the most obtuse crock of s* by detourdog on Wednesday May 10, 2023 @09:04AM (#35886751)

I'm not disagreeing. To say that there is only one way or to project presumed goals and intentions is too far for me.

I firmly believe that protocols are developed through vigorous rewrites and aren't nearly as important as the data-stores they provide access to. I would like our data-stores to be stagnant and as required we develop protocols. Figuring out a method to deal with whatever the hosted data-store's chosen protocol is seems correct to me. I just don't see mutual exclusivity. Consider the power of supporting both protocols.

[ Parent | on HN ]