Received: from spf5.us4.outblaze.com (spf5.us4.outblaze.com [205.158.62.27]) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iAG4Zpsw017822 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2004 04:35:52 GMT Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [199.232.76.165]) by spf5.us4.outblaze.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF6A476EAA for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2004 04:35:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CTvD2-0002RI-Br for migo@homemail.com; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:44:52 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CTvCg-0002R7-RK for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:44:30 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CTvCg-0002Qi-3C for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:44:30 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CTvCf-0002Qf-Ve for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:44:30 -0500 Received: from [206.190.36.79] (helo=smtp101.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CTv3T-0007MC-Cb for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:34:59 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.localdomain) (dpaun@rogers.com@69.194.157.31 with login) by smtp101.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com with SMTP; 16 Nov 2004 04:34:58 -0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain (dimi [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id iAG4YtnB031406; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:34:55 -0500 Received: (from dimi@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id iAG4YsVe031405; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:34:54 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.localdomain: dimi set sender to dpaun@rogers.com using -f Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:34:54 -0500 From: "Dimitrie O. Paun" To: mlh@zipworld.com.au Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Archives vs. categories vs. versions Message-ID: <20041116043454.GT6137@rogers.com> References: <20041115191000.GA30577@rogers.com> <41990CD4.9050003@arbash-meinel.com> <20041115225611.GC28559@zipworld.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041115225611.GC28559@zipworld.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Cc: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org, "Dimitrie O. Paun" X-BeenThere: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: a discussion list for all things arch-ish List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Errors-To: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Status: RO Content-Length: 1444 Lines: 40 On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 09:56:11AM +1100, mlh@zipworld.com.au wrote: > The naming of archives seems to more based on other considerations > such as your mail@address (of course) representing a role you're > fulfilling (debian maintainer, private stuff, own hobby projects) > and the visibility (and perhaps license) of the code within, > plus a time marking when you began it, so: > > a@debian.org--2004 > a@home.org--2005 > a@home.org--private-2005 > a@home.org--public-2005 Why the time marking? I understand it's needed to work around some performance issues, but in all honesty it looks like a hack. Moreover, it's hard to automate. Why is it needed in to begin with? > For projects within a big organization you might have the > mainline trees in an archive named after the app, because > that's not going to change, but otherwise I suspect it just > hinders things. What would it hinder? And what about large sites, say SourceForge? What if they switch to arch? It would seem quite natural to me to create an archive for every project: user@sourceforge.net--myproject Having the year in there would create lots of trouble and maintenance costs going forward. Can it be avoided? And at what cost? -- Dimi. _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/