On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 12:25 PM, <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

I am conscious that the bad decisions on re-use of Starlink
document numbers happened on my watch - profound apologies! I

Thank you.

It's things like the Starlink bulletins referencing a SUN which has long been reused which are the real bugbear. Another fun one is SUN/2 used to be a MAG document before it became a NDG document and of course MAG moved to SUN/171 :-)

recall entertaining private doubts at the time but was *somehow*
persuaded that it was best. There were definitely arguments in
favour, but I now can't imagine what they were. I think the main
difference between then and now was that the issue was entirely
local to the Project and the possibility of the documents being
part of a globally accessible filing system was not considered.

Yes. I'm sure there was a good reason. For a project that was so well documented it's ironic how quickly documents disappeared.

I'm trying to get the SUNs sorted out for ADS first so that the Bulletins and enterprises can cite them properly when I upload those.

Tim Jenness