sfk1 at bigfoot.com
Sat Jun 28 06:20:07 PDT 2003
* Jeroen Coumans <jeroencoumans at gmx.net> wrote:
> Stefan Krah said the following on 28-6-2003 9:20:
>> Could you please name the groups lfs.faq and lfs.website. The faq
>> group right now looks strange w/o the lfs hierarchy.
> That was my idea. The FAQ and the Website are "meta" projects, they
> concern all current LFS projects (LFS, BLFS, ALFS and the hints). So
> they shouldn't fall in the hierarchy of LFS alone.
> The names are thus chosen because of their semantic correctness. esides,
> they're identified by the @linuxfromscratch.org so I don't see the problem.
I get the idea and for the mailinglists it is ok, but for news it is not.
Look at my /var/spool/news:
root at canberra:~# ls /var/spool/news/
blfs dormant.groups faq interesting.groups lfs out.going
de failed.postings in.coming leaf.node message.id temp.files
You see the top level hierarchies blfs, de, lfs and *faq*. I also use
another news server, news.cis.dfn.de. What if cis.dfn.de decides to
create a top level hierarchy named faq? (Yes, I know they won't, but
why should LFS use top level hierarchies so lavishly?)
One should keep in mind that LFS is not only the LFS project, but also
the abbreviation for linuxfromscratch[.org]. The top level hierarchy
lfs.* refers to the domain as well as to the project. It would even make
sense to drop blfs.* and create groups like lfs.blfs.support. (But I
don't really suggest that, just making a point.)
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-dev