Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!sun-barr!lll-winken!uunet!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!sci.ccny.cuny.edu!cucard!sci.ccny.cuny.edu!unmvax!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!execu!sequoia!rpp386!jfh From: jfh@rpp386.UUCP Newsgroups: alt.sources.d Subject: Re: Archive-name Message-ID: Date: 27 Aug 90 07:25:40 GMT References: <1990Aug13.162617.25478@cbnews.att.com> <9008211455.AA02499@talos.pm.com> Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) Organization: Lone Star Cafe and BBS Service Lines: 20 X-Clever-Slogan: Recycle or Die. In article <9008211455.AA02499@talos.pm.com> kjones@talos.pm.com (Kyle Jones) writes: >The poster of a useful program might well think it's not much to >ask that recipients look at the article and decide where to file >it. Some people don't care if their program is archived or not. The point about an Archive-Name: header is not to make it easier for users, but rather to make it easier for archivers. What is wrong with Peter's insistence that everyone add an Archive-Name: header is the incorrect assumption that everyone wants to have that particular version of that particular program archived. I, for one, frequently use alt.sources to release test versions of code that I most certainly don't want archived. Posters should be permitted to decide if they want their postings archived. -- John F. Haugh II UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh Ma Bell: (512) 832-8832 Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org "SCCS, the source motel! Programs check in and never check out!" -- Ken Thompson