If this is about not rewriting scripts, users could run a cron job to rsync the files to a local repository and then run their own ftp server to run the script. … or are we about to loose rsync as well? Stewart > On 18 Nov 2020, at 14:36, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > There seem to be two groups of users causing the discussion. > One set are folks who use scripts that will be discommoded if we drop FTP access. That is a concern. But a somewhat manageable one. And one where we havve to at some point be able to say "no, we do not supporting things forever". > > The other argument is that there exist a set of people who will be unable to practically get the documents if we drop the FTP access. If true, that is important. But we do not appear to ahve any way to evaluate the statement as other than a hypothetical. We know such people could exist. But do we know if they do exist? > > It seems to me that arguing for keeping the service because people in the second category may exist is a very weak argument. > > Yours, > Joel > > On 11/18/2020 9:26 AM, Keith Moore wrote: >> On 11/18/20 9:21 AM, Lou Berger wrote: >>> How about: the FTP Service will be discontinued when FTP (RFC959) is moved to Historic status. >>> >> One of the problems I have in general with reclassifying things as Historic is that this can lead to deprecation of services that are still quite useful, without the implications of such deprecation even being discussed, and without providing any advice about how to transition. >> "Historic" may be the wrong way of describing the situation. More accurately, a protocol may change from mainstream use - where it's the widely accepted way of doing some particular thing - to occasional or fringe use, where it's still useful in corner cases even though it's no longer the widely accepted way of doing that thing. >> Keith >
