Subject: Re: implementing a name service switch...
To: Chris G Demetriou <Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU>
From: Greg A. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/06/1994 10:46:41
[ On Mon, December 5, 1994 at 20:57:07 (-0500), Chris G Demetriou wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: implementing a name service switch...
> [ why is this on tech-net? it doesn't belong here. however, now that
> it is... ]
[[ meta-comment/question: why shouldn't it be? ]]
> I also don't think it's worthwhile putting HESIOD code in the source
> tree. I actually am marginally against YP, but a large number of
> people actually use it. I see adding HESIOD as adding an awful lot of
> code-maintenance overhead, for a very, very small gain.
I'd vote for cleaning out the YP stuff again too, though given the
headache it is to incorporate (insidious damn stuff, eh!?!), deleting it
would present a terrible headache for those that must use it. Perhaps
they should be responsible for maintaining it....
Perhaps the same comment should apply to those wanting hesiod.
On the other hand, would the people who "want" these features be
appeased by adding something less insidious, that worked with the normal
system as-is, etc.? (Eg. something like Perdue's ACMAINT?)
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 443-1734 VE3TCP robohack!woods
Planix, Inc. <email@example.com>; UniForum Canada <firstname.lastname@example.org>