[Cosmo-dev] CMP 0.4 spec review

[Brian Moseley]

On 1/23/07, Mikeal Rogers <mikeal at osafoundation.org> wrote:
> Would it be less confusing to just use the current release version of
> cosmo as the CMP version rather than maintaining another version scheme?

yes.

all of the changes that have gone into cmp since the last time the
spec was updated should be folded into the main spec. we don't need to
maintain an explicit version number for cmp, especially since the
protocol doesn't support version negotiation.