[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multi-committer functionality revisited

From: Stephen J. Turnbull
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multi-committer functionality revisited
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:37:35 +0900
User-agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.5 (celeriac, linux)

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lord <address@hidden> writes:

    Tom> It is, indeed, truly sad that the "scheme" syntax is
    Tom> sufficiently anemic as to make parameterized protocols more
    Tom> difficult than necessary to name but I see nothing that
    Tom> precludes them and they seem like a quite sane idea to me.

Would it help to mention that the scheme is primarily a keyword which
specifies the syntax that follows the colon?  That's why it's called
"scheme" rather than "method" or "access" or "protocol".

As Robert points out, the emphasis is on _uniform_.  _Uniform_
Resource Indicator parsers will not do anything sensible with your
structured schemes.

Yeah, you could write a better standard.  "So many standards, so
little time," ya know?  Use the standard, bitch about it (that takes
no effort ;), and spend your time and skill on things that matter.

Or decide that the standard sucks and do something better, but
recognizably different.  If you warp the existing standard as you
propose, your name will be cursed eternally, and a place in the 2d
Circle of Hell reserved for you.  :-)

Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
               Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
              ask what your business can "do for" free software.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]