RFA: Document conventions for terminating query/set packet names

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 10:24:22AM -0700, Jim Blandy wrote:
> All right.  I think one of my subconscious motivations was that I
> didn't like breaking a new feature for an older, deprecated feature. 
> But this isn't about "fairness" to features; it's about gettings
> things working without breaking too much stuff.  So I'll go along with
> retiring the qL and qP prefixes.

Thanks.  Aside from Eli's question I'm fine with this.

I'm wondering if we should mark the qC prefix "bad" too.  I realize
there's already qCRC: and I'm not suggesting we rename that.  But of
the two other stubs I checked today, both supported qC and neither
checked that the C was at the end of the packet.

Amusingly enough, one of them also supported qCRC:, and had a hack to
check for that first.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery