Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc:20861 comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d:1273 Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!cwjcc!hal!nic.MR.NET!tank!ads4 From: ads4@tank.uchicago.edu (adam david sah) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d Subject: Re: DESCRIBE.TXT Summary: you want flames? I give you flames! Keywords: FOAD (last two words are And Die.) Message-ID: <646@tank.uchicago.edu> Date: 3 Nov 88 23:17:56 GMT References: <1565@sun.soe.clarkson.edu> <592@tank.uchicago.edu> <7377@dasys1.UUCP> Reply-To: ads4@tank.uchicago.edu.UUCP (adam david sah) Organization: University of Chicago Lines: 14 In article <7377@dasys1.UUCP> tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes: >Any sysop dumb enough to cumulatively de-ARC one package after another >into the same directory rather than checking them out one at a time, >deserves whatever he gets. README is an excellent convention, used by >pd programmers and commercial vendors alike. Who died and left you God? I do that al the time, since it is NOT practical to start unARCing things "as-you-go". I usually like to sit down and try it all out at once (it isn't hard to tell which thing came from which package... Furthermore, even if your point HAD some validity, it loses that to the fact that some of these files are left lying around AFTER all is said and done... and what about THOSE??? Some README.DOCs/READ.MEs/README.s etc give VERY IMPORTANT INFORMATION about the file and its usage... renaming those is silly, too, when they shouldn't be given that name in the first place (in our hypothetical model) SHEESH!!!! It's just as easy to add an ".RME" or a ".DSC" to a filename as it is to give it the usual READ.ME which tells you NOTHING (it also doesn't tell you which prg it came from... after all is said and done!) -A.Sah'88 SysOp, The Art of Science BBs (312)752-6104