Going back to the original problem at hand, wouldn't this service not be needed if the underlying filesystem was moved to a filesystem with support for deduplication? (You'll still have multiple versions of jQuery, but at least you'll only internally have one copy of each version unless it was locally modified by someone.) Just a thought. Sangwhan On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote: > +1 to all of Tobi's suggestion on this thread. > > In particular, I read the Team-only wiki page, and there's nothing there > that couldn't be public. Public resources are more likely to be maintained, > and more likely to help others understand our publication processes. > > Regards– > –Doug > > > On 7/29/15 3:18 AM, Tobie Langel wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015, at 05:00, Antonio Olmo Titos wrote: >> >>> On 28/07/15 Tobie wrote: >>> >>>> Would be good to at least have wiki/index page consistency (i.e. make >>>> them both member-only, or better: both public). >>>> >>> >>> I don't think that is useful or even advisable, Tobie. >>> These wiki pages we use to discuss low-level technical details; they may >>> contain info about our implementation, systems, etc. >>> >> >> I wouldn't know since I don't have access to them. >> >> I just changed copy and style to make it more clear that's a secondary >>> resource, available only to the team. >>> >> >> My point still holds, though. Either the info is useful and it should be >> open or it's not and it shouldn't be mentioned. >> >> Currently it just feels like there are completely artificial >> confidentiality rings for no (good) reason whatsoever. >> >> Just my CHF 0.02. :) >> >> --tobie >> >> > -- Sangwhan Moon [Opera Software ASA] Software Engineer | Tokyo, Japan
Received on Friday, 2 October 2015 10:03:21 UTC