Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!math.lsa.umich.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!sumax!polari!6sceng!blm From: blm@6sceng.UUCP (Brian Matthews) Newsgroups: news.software.b Subject: Re: Usage of Supersedes Message-ID: <485@6sceng.UUCP> Date: 24 Jul 90 15:39:25 GMT References: <1990Jul22.085726.22462@looking.on.ca> <1990Jul23.204531.3178@ladc.bull.com> Organization: Six Sigma CASE, Inc. Lines: 26 In article <1990Jul23.204531.3178@ladc.bull.com> fmayhar@hermes.ladc.bull.com writes: |Well, if you didn't have to unshar the map files, we could just leave the maps |in the spool directory, and Supercedes would work like as originally expected. |Unfortunately, you _do_ have to unshar them, and it's way too expensive |to keep two copies of the maps. Nope. At my previous job, I had modified pathalias to skip the shar header stuff and then process the map info, so I didn't need the map files except in the spool directory. Unfortunately I lost the changes when I changed jobs, but as I recall they were fairly simple. I'd make the changes again, except I now just punt path lookup to a neighboring site :-) (with the sites permission, of course.) ||> Amanda may have a very good point about creating a ``USENET II''. |I agree. That's probably the only way we'll be able to make significant |changes in anything like a timely manner. That's the only way we'll be able to make any significant changes *ever*. Usenet (Classic :-)) is very entrenched and many of the installations unsupported, so any change that requires all sites to upgrade their software will never fly. Usenet II (Usenets? Usenetter? :-)) would, at least initially, be completely separate (but maybe parallel), and any site participating would have to be willing and able to upgrade their software fairly quickly, or be dropped. Eventually gateways could be written, but I don't think compatibility should be a consideration for Usenet II.