We really should NOT be recycling SUN numbers.
..David
-----Original Message-----
From: Starlink development
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: 3/17/2004 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: Primdat's bad values
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004, Malcolm J. Currie wrote:
> \begin{rant}
> It was a big mistake to reuse document numbers. Besides
> not losing old stuff, confusion over citations, filing, we'd know how
> many documents we'd written. The last point is surprising knowing
> Mike's love of statistics and record keeping.
> \end{rant}
since you mention it .. I asked Steve for a SUN number for TOPCAT
a couple of weeks ago and he gave me SUN/178 (used to be XADAM,
whatever that was). I queried it saying that a new one might lead
to less confusion, but didn't get a response, so I am currently
reusing SUN/178. If our collective view is that recycling
is a bad idea, then Steve can I have a nice new number please?
If not, maybe a defense of recycling policy (I don't see us hitting
2^31 any time soon) would be in order.
Mark
--
Mark Taylor Starlink Programmer Physics, Bristol University, UK
[log in to unmask] +44-117-928-8776 http://www.star.bris.ac.uk/~mbt/
|