| 1 |
On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 5:09 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o> |
| 2 |
wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 01/05/2018 10:28 PM, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On 2018-01-05 15:16, William Hubbs wrote: |
| 6 |
> >> If we have a default expiration, it should be one year after the date |
| 7 |
> >> posted to go along with our current policy of not supporting things that |
| 8 |
> >> are older than a year. |
| 9 |
> >> |
| 10 |
> >> William |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > I thought it was three years. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > At any rate, I think a year is too short. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > How about 18 months? |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> I might sound like a broken CD here, but why define the expiration as |
| 20 |
> part of the news format instead of specifying it in the package manager |
| 21 |
> as a user defined variable? Various use cases requires different |
| 22 |
> treatment, so leaving it up to user seems more relevant to me, and we |
| 23 |
> could allow information to be presented as part of stages to give a hint |
| 24 |
> for what dates to look for? |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
The short answer is I haven't seen any real use cases for it and even if we |
| 28 |
were to spec it out and add it, I don't think it would be used by more than |
| 29 |
10 people. To me that is an incentive to avoid complicating the software |
| 30 |
spec. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-A |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
> -- |
| 36 |
> Kristian Fiskerstrand |
| 37 |
> OpenPGP keyblock reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net |
| 38 |
> fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3 |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> |
Archives