Path: utzoo!utstat!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!rpi!tale
From: tale@cs.rpi.edu (David C Lawrence)
Newsgroups: news.software.b
Subject: Re: Dynamic "smart" expiration?
Message-ID: <1+G_R_@rpi.edu>
Date: 31 Dec 89 23:13:31 GMT
References: <1989Dec27.033817.9953@smsc.sony.com>
	<1989Dec28.063932.13720@robohack.UUCP> <68634@looking.on.ca>
	<1989Dec29.213539.2801@utzoo.uucp> <6118@yunexus.UUCP>
	<69448@looking.on.ca> <1120@utoday.UUCP> <`QF52&@rpi.edu>
	<69654@looking.on.ca> <89Dec31.171430es
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
Lines: 19

In article <89Dec31.171430est.2251@neat.cs.toronto.edu> moraes@cs.toronto.edu (Mark Moraes) writes:
> For us, centralizing .newsrcs is technically hard (we prefer less
> interdependency between our servers, not more) and politically
> impossible.
[ And other stuff about how it isn't such a hot idea at his site.] 

Indeed.  This site is quite the same way; nevertheless the model is
acceptable for many other sites on the net.  I avoided bringing up the
issue that it won't work with sites of our nature because that isn't
entirely relevant.  If a lot of people can benefit from expiry of the
nature proposed, then it is useful work in spite of the fact that it
isn't useful to us.  The mistake, of course, would be to make this the
only way expiry could be done.  I don't recall seeing anyone make such
a ludicrous suggestion as that though -- besides, the distributed
sites could always just keep what we've got now. :-)

Dave
-- 
   (setq mail '("tale@cs.rpi.edu" "tale@ai.mit.edu" "tale@rpitsmts.bitnet"))