Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!lll-winken!uunet!ncc!atha!lyndon From: lyndon@cs.AthabascaU.CA (Lyndon Nerenberg) Newsgroups: comp.sources.d Subject: Re: Posting Patches; Was Patch frequency Keywords: Patches, News Message-ID: <591@aurora.AthabascaU.CA> Date: 19 May 89 01:29:26 GMT References: <340@ubbs-nh.MV.COM> Reply-To: lyndon@auvax.UUCP (Lyndon Nerenberg) Organization: Athabasca University Lines: 36 In article <340@ubbs-nh.MV.COM> noel@ubbs-nh.MV.COM (Noel B. Del More Nashua) writes: >I would have suggested that "official" patches be posted to the same >newsgroup as to which the original was posted but that might not be >possible, wise or too much of an additional burden on the moderators of >these groups. The current setup used by comp.sources.{unix,misc,games,x} is to include a header in the message body of the format PRODUCT/PART#. Most existing automated source archivers seek out this information and use it to build the pathnames in the archive tree. The moderators are responsible to see that the PRODUCT part of the header is unique across all posted software packages within their group. The PART# part of this header consists of (usually) the string "Part##" with ## replaced by a numerically ascending sequence of numbers. If the Part## string were replaced by Patch## for postings of patches, the existing archiving software would automatically tuck the patches away for safe keeping right along side of the corresponding source. No muss, no fuss. This also solves a potential conflict between package names if we were to use a single common patch group. What if Rich Salz and Brandon Allbery post seperate packages to their respective groups, each called "foo?" We would need to include group information in patch postings in addition to the other info. By posting patches via the original group, possible name space collision is avoided. One problem with this idea is the delay in getting things "out the door." I don't perceive this to be as big of a problem as some people think, as I'm sure the moderators would give priority to patches over original source (primarily based on the assumption that patches are smaller than source postings :-) -- Lyndon Nerenberg / Computing Services / Athabasca University {alberta,decwrl,ncc}!atha!lyndon || lyndon@cs.AthabascaU.CA