On Mon, 11 Jul 2022, Rui Ueyama wrote: > > but ignoring min_api_supported is wrong, and assuming max_api_supported > 0 > > is also wrong. It really should check how given [min; max] range intersects > > with its own range of supported versions. > > Currently only one version is defined which is LAPI_V1. I don't think > LAPI_UNSPECIFIED is a version number; rather, it's an unspecified > value. No ordering should be defined between a defined value and an > unspecified value. If LAPI_UNSPECIFIED < LAPI_V1, it should be renamed > LAPI_V0.
You still cannot rely on API guarantees of LAPI_V1 when the plugin does not advertise it (thread safety of claim_file in this particular case). And you still should check the intersection of supported API ranges and give a sane diagnostic when min_api_supported advertised by the plugin exceeds LAPI_V1 (though, granted, the plugin could error out as well in this case). Alexander
