C News patch of 7-Sep-1990

[John Eras]

>>...Their software has caused my site and the rest of the net
>>considerable grief due to the (now fixed) inews -C bug and the overly long
>>message id's (which broke rn).  This is whether I run C News or 2.11.  The
>>problem with their patch scheme is that many admins are unsure if it is safe
>>to apply a patch or if they are up to date ...
>
>One of the reasons why we're reluctant to change our patch scheme is pure
>spleen against people who appear to be blindly prejudiced against it, as
>shown by the silly reasons they advance.
>
>[... blah blah blah, lots of talk about numbered vs. dated patches ...]
>
>If there are other solid reasons for going one way or the other -- mind
>you, I'm talking about numbering vs. dating, not about patch frequency
>or people who won't apply patches or people who want a magic way to tell
>whether they are up to date -- I'd be interested to hear them.

Not that this particularly affects me, but how about patches that are
both numbered *and* dated?  Wow!  The best of both worlds...

Or am I just being a bonehead?

----------------------- (: smile! you're on usenet! :) ------------------------
AT:    jeras at oracle.com                              | "It's a terrible waste
BANG:  ...{pacbell,hplabs,apple,decwrl}!oracle!jeras | to lose one's .sig, or
FLAME: /dev/null (nyuk, nyuk)                        | not to have one at all."