[Overquoting for the sake of python-dev readers] On Fri, Aug 18, 2000 at 04:06:20PM -0400, Fred L. Drake, Jr. wrote: >amk writes: > > I have a copy of Tim O'Malley's Cookie.py,v file (in order to preserve the > > version history). I can either ask the SF admins to drop it into > > the right place in the CVS repository, but will that screw up the > > Python 1.6 tagging in some way? (I would expect not, but who > > knows?) > > That would have no effect on any of the Python tagging. It's >probably worthwhile making sure there are no tags in the ,v file, but >that can be done after it gets dropped in place. > Now, Greg Stein will tell us that dropping this into place is the >wrong thing to do. What it *will* screw up is people asking for the >state of Python at a specific date before the file was actually added; >they'll get this file even for when it wasn't in the Python CVS tree. >I can live with that, but we should make a policy decision for the >Python tree regarding this sort of thing. Excellent point. GvR's probably the only person whose ruling matters on this point; I'll try to remember it and bring it up whenever he gets back (next week, right?). > Don't -- it's not worth it. I hate throwing away information that stands even a tiny chance of being useful; good thing the price of disk storage keeps dropping, eh? The version history might contain details that will be useful in future debugging or code comprehension, so I dislike losing it forever. (My minimalist side is saying that the enhanced Web tools should be a separately downloadable package. But you probably guessed that already...) --amk
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4