Re: 2.0

[Erik Ostrom <eostrom@research.att.com>]

>  > might also be worth stating explicitly that if you understand ranges
>  > 1.0 to 2.1 and you communicate with someone who states version ranges
>  > 1.0 to 2.0, you're stuck with 1.0 for common ground.
> 
> did i miss something?  why is this the case?

Because there is no published spec for 2.0.  Suppose you're trying to
implement a client that understands MCP 2.1, and you also want it to
support 1.0.  If you also had to understand "2.0", you'd be kind of up
a creek, no?  Given that there is no spec and there are multiple
interpretations.

So, you have to interpret version ranges as "over known versions".  Of
course, the 2.0 server that you're communicating with will think you
understand 2.0.  So guess my solution to that is "stamp out 2.0".

--Erik