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 :)