On Mon, 27 Sep 2010, Justin P. Mattock wrote: > On 09/27/2010 09:03 AM, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Mon, 2010-09-27 at 11:10 -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 11:31:15AM -0700, Justin P. Mattock wrote: > > > > Below is an updated patch from the original fixing broken web > > > > addresses in the kernel. Thanks for all the help and info on this > > > > to everybody.. Hopefully I didnt miss any of them(if so let me > > > > know, and I'll resend). > > > Changing a URL for a relocated page is one thing, but removing links > > > isn't necessarily a great idea. Even if the site is technically > > > gone, it may be possible to find information e.g through the > > > Internet Archive Wayback Machine. > > > > Perhaps it'd be better to scrape the contents of the various web > > pages, collect them somewhere like wiki.kernel.org and encourage > > others to put new contributions in that site. The copyright problem aside, this might be a good idea for material not already archived but I don't think it makes sense to start a new archive when archive.org (or other) has the information. And which version(s) do you scrape? I discussed some problems with changing URLs in another thread: http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/9/22/22 Anyway, without knowing what future archive(s) would be available or relevant to any given URL in the future, I think the best we might do is a "Retrieved on YYYY-MM-DD" qualification for new URLs. > > > yeah I think somebody was saying something about having a separate file, > with all the web addresses in them or something...In any case, up to you > guys.. I don't see how moving the addresses would help. And would it not make the information harder to find? Finn > > Justin P. Mattock > _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
