Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote on 21 July 2008 19:51:
> From: "Dave Korn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Hear, hear. The name of the list is an arbitrary label, not
>> instructions on what kind of client to use to access the repository;
>> why, just for the sake of making it "correct" in some non-functional
>> sense of the word should everyone in the world have to adjust their
>> whitelists/forwards/spamfilters/webarchives/etc.?
>>
>> There should be a fairly clear benefit before asking all those people to
>> do all that work.
>
>
> Jeez, I didn't realize people felt so viscerally against this.
"Visceral" is too strong a word for how I feel about it; sorry if I was a
bit hyperbolic there!
> I don't think humans post to it either, it only gets machine generated
> messages from checkins. So it's not like address books would have to be
> updated. (Personally I only access it from the website if I'm looking for
> something specific). But seems like you think I'm wrong on how difficult
> this change would be for users.
I'm thinking mostly of the independent external ML archives like MARC,
nabble, archives.free.net, archivum.info, gmane.... they'd all have to
adjust their setups and/or break indexing across the name change.
"Viscerally against" is too strong, but it seemed to me that the costs,
although not huge, could outweigh the benefits, which seemed very very
minor.
> Okay, no big deal. A comment on the webpage I mentioned could be another
> way to address my point about the name being misleading...
It's pretty obvious the moment you read the content of any of the posts
that it can't be cvs and has to be svn, even more so if you follow one of
the viewvc links... but it couldn't hurt to make it explicit, I'm sure.
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....
