Siebrand Mazeland wrote:
*sigh*
Please look a little further. I never claimed there were ads on
example.[org|com|net]. There were ads on [some of|many of] the other URLs
that were used as example URLs. These were normalised *and*
example.com was
changed to
example.org - yes, because we like .org better than .com.
I couldn't care less about you reverting .org to .com, I would have cared if
you reverted to all the 'spammy' URLs that made less sense.
Siebrand
So that was it!
Given that this thread started by r37552, which just changed
example.com
to
exaple.org, it was hard to understand.
Retroactively, it wopuld have been clearer if explained like
"I changed all the extlink_sample (many of them full of ads) on r37553
to the RFC2606 compliant
http://www.example.org I simply also changed
the existing
example.com addresses to .org as we favour .org over .com"
That would have avoided the
example.com is also RFC2606 compliant! I now
see you referred to this on "First in the English localisation, then in
100+ others." but giving revision numbers would have helped. I think the
problem is that r37552 makes little sense. On the other hand, if given
with the r37553 diffs, it can be easily understood that the motivation
was changing the spammy urls.
Not making a critic of you, just philosophing about programmer diff
comprehension :)