Re: archiving old versions (was: Re: [ns] (Urgent!) ns-2.1b2 is needed!)

[Frank Chu <frankchu_ns@yahoo.com>]

I still think archiving old stuff is important
especially when ns-2.1b2 is really not that old.  The
other important reason is that some research papers
claim they have done experiments in a certain old ns
version.  When you compare your improved schemes with
them, it is important to run them in the versions
under which they were developed, to ensure 100%
correctness in performance evaluation, and solidify
your research claims.

Frank

--- John Heidemann <johnh@isi.edu> wrote:
> >On Tue, 14 Mar 2000, John Heidemann wrote:
> >
> >> In general, we archive all versions of our stuff
> (except when lost),
> >> but we don't archive other people's stuff.
> >
> >Even when the other people's stuff morphs into your
> stuff?
> >The your/other people's then becomes a bit tenuous,
> and providing a
> >complete history of your stuff (as in this case
> with otcl) seems a
> >reasonable thing to do.
> 
> At which time we take over maintence of it we begin
> archiving it.
> While providing prior versions would be nice to do,
> it's hard
> to justify taking resources away from enhancing the
> current version to
> resurrecting old versions.  (This is part of the
> reason we try fairly
> hard to not break interfaces at the Tcl-level, as
> well.)
> 
> (Yes, finding a single copy of something old might
> be fairly easy, but
> then linking it to the web pages, and answering
> questions about it,
> and...  unforunately the limit of a sum of trivial
> tasks is 1, not 0. :-)
> 
>    -John Heidemann
> 
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com