Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>> Your suggest opens the doors for a horrible pile of spaghetti over the
>>> years. Consider... we have developers in contributors, sponsors in
>>> donors, resources in links on and on and on.
>>>
>>> It is a mistake, flat out.
>>>
>>>> For example, hosting pages are served by professional.php. Techdocs are
>>>> served by communitydocs.php. That is *intended*.
>>>>
>>> If it is intended it is a mistake. Techdocs should be served by techdocs
>>> and now my point above is made.
>>
>> why ?
>
> Please read the thread. I have made it very clear. This is a management
> nightmare in the making and frankly the fact that I know the above now,
> I am going to submit a patch to fix that laziness too.
I suggest you find at least one person who actually agrees with you
(amongst the people who are maintaining the stuff, or are likely to in
the future) before you put too much time into that :-P
>> I don't see the point in renaming files for no real purpose (other
>> than "it looks nicer to the five odd people browsing the source" and
>> having to deal with annoyances as a result)
>>
>
> I propose we rename all files based on the timestamp plus milliseconds
> of their first commit. The dispatcher is there, it can take care of
> everything. Barring that, because we want svn diff capability... we
> leave all old files as they are but all new files must be named by the
> EPOCH.
Um. That would be exactly the "renaming files for no real purpose" that
Stefan said he didn't see the point of ;-)
//Magnus
