Xref: utzoo news.software.b:5794 comp.sources.bugs:2566
Path: utzoo!utstat!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!apple!fernwood!oracle!news
From: jeras@oracle.oracle.com (John Eras)
Newsgroups: news.software.b,comp.sources.bugs
Subject: Re: C News patch of 7-Sep-1990
Message-ID: <1990Sep20.022542.21910@oracle.com>
Date: 20 Sep 90 02:25:42 GMT
References: <1990Sep9.230537.18939@zoo.toronto.edu> <1990Sep13.203645.12937@scuzzy.mbx.sub.org> <1990Sep17.010600.11421@vicom.com> <1990Sep17.121127.25859@ni.umd.edu> <1990Sep17.210150.1586@vicom.com> <1990Sep18.222450.25228@zoo.toronto.edu>
Reply-To: jeras@oracle.com (John Eras)
Organization: Oracle Corporation, Belmont, CA
Lines: 26

>>...Their software has caused my site and the rest of the net
>>considerable grief due to the (now fixed) inews -C bug and the overly long
>>message id's (which broke rn).  This is whether I run C News or 2.11.  The
>>problem with their patch scheme is that many admins are unsure if it is safe
>>to apply a patch or if they are up to date ...
>
>One of the reasons why we're reluctant to change our patch scheme is pure
>spleen against people who appear to be blindly prejudiced against it, as
>shown by the silly reasons they advance.
>
>[... blah blah blah, lots of talk about numbered vs. dated patches ...]
>
>If there are other solid reasons for going one way or the other -- mind
>you, I'm talking about numbering vs. dating, not about patch frequency
>or people who won't apply patches or people who want a magic way to tell
>whether they are up to date -- I'd be interested to hear them.

Not that this particularly affects me, but how about patches that are
both numbered *and* dated?  Wow!  The best of both worlds...

Or am I just being a bonehead?

----------------------- (: smile! you're on usenet! :) ------------------------
AT:    jeras@oracle.com                              | "It's a terrible waste
BANG:  ...{pacbell,hplabs,apple,decwrl}!oracle!jeras | to lose one's .sig, or
FLAME: /dev/null (nyuk, nyuk)                        | not to have one at all."