On Sat, 27 Jul 2002, Richard Atterer wrote: > Hi, > > I noticed that the current naming scheme for .jigdo files will make it > impossible for users to tell whether they're downloading 3.0r0 or > 3.0r1 unless they actually download the .jigdo file and let jigdo-lite > print the .iso name. > > That's not ideal - maybe it would be better to use the same name stem > as for the iso files, e.g. "debian-30r0-i386-binary-1.jigdo"?
i actually think the iso filename is too long/descriptive given the location anyway, e.g for us, /pub/debian-cd/3.0_r0/i386/<filename>. there is already enough metadata in the path to let people know that the files in the directory are iso images for woody for the i386 arch, so i prefer the naming scheme we used to have of binary-i386-1.iso and so on. i think something similar for jigdo would make sense, e.g /pub/debian-cd/jigdo-area/3.0r0/i386/<files> /pub/debian-cd/jigdo-area/3.0r1/i386/<files> . . regards, -jason -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
