[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: gratuitous change blocks upgrade to :-(

Well, no rants, but I'm in qualified agreement with Scott [just
this once, heh]...  that yes, those of us stuck in 80x25 terminals
and antique text comment databases could use a multiline format.
It the project is concerned about the replace vs. add semantics,
one could add two new exclude[exit]nodesmethod options. Where method
is replace or add. Yet it is just an ease of use thing, and does
have a certain impact on downstream controller code. So as long as
the config does what the docs say it does, in whatever mode it ends
up taking, that's fine, people will hack and make do either way.
Config file and controller interface should act the same though.

Also, regarding the interaction with HS directory lookups and
excludenodes... i would suggest that specification in excludenodes
should prevent all contact with such node for all reasons. Or just
make another option for how to handle that case as well. This is
more important than the above paragraph. As one could have a node
that is a 'bad' exit through no fault/intent of its operator...
such as being plugged into a non-ideal isp... yet it would still
be perfectly useful when acting as a non-exit or directory provider.
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx with
unsubscribe or-talk    in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/