Re: [RFC v4]update broken web addresses in the kernel.

[Finn Thain <fthain@telegraphics.com.au>]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2010, Justin P. Mattock wrote:

> On 09/27/2010 09:03 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-09-27 at 11:10 -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
> > > On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 11:31:15AM -0700, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
> > > > Below is an updated patch from the original fixing broken web 
> > > > addresses in the kernel. Thanks for all the help and info on this 
> > > > to everybody.. Hopefully I didnt miss any of them(if so let me 
> > > > know, and I'll resend).
> > > Changing a URL for a relocated page is one thing, but removing links 
> > > isn't necessarily a great idea.  Even if the site is technically 
> > > gone, it may be possible to find information e.g through the 
> > > Internet Archive Wayback Machine.
> > 
> > Perhaps it'd be better to scrape the contents of the various web 
> > pages, collect them somewhere like wiki.kernel.org and encourage 
> > others to put new contributions in that site.

The copyright problem aside, this might be a good idea for material not 
already archived but I don't think it makes sense to start a new 
archive when archive.org (or other) has the information.

And which version(s) do you scrape? I discussed some problems with 
changing URLs in another thread: http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/9/22/22

Anyway, without knowing what future archive(s) would be available or 
relevant to any given URL in the future, I think the best we might do is a 
"Retrieved on YYYY-MM-DD" qualification for new URLs.

> 
> 
> yeah I think somebody was saying something about having a separate file, 
> with all the web addresses in them or something...In any case, up to you 
> guys..

I don't see how moving the addresses would help.
And would it not make the information harder to find?

Finn

> 
> Justin P. Mattock
>