Micah Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Christian Roche has submitted a revised version of a patch to modify > the unique-name-finding algorithm to generate names in the pattern > "foo-n.html" rather than "foo.html.n". The patch looks good, and > will likely go in very soon.
foo.html.n has the advantage of simplicity: you can tell at a glance that <foo>.n is a duplicate of <foo>. Also, it is trivial to remove the unwanted files by removing <foo>.*. Why change what worked so well in the past? > A couple of minor detail questions: what do you guys think about using > "foo.n.html" instead of "foo-n.html"? Better, but IMHO not as good as foo.html.n. But I'm obviously biased. :-)
