On 2/20/07, Platonides <Platonides(a)gmail.com> wrote:
If i had such free service, i'd set a server doing
it for me :P
If it's a 'private' service, things gets easier:
-Authentication: Use a variable account name as password.
A "variable account name"?
-Stripping out signatures: You use the same email
ssystem -> Always the
same signature.
Well, not strictly true. Friend of mine puts his server's uptime in his sig...
Is merging really a safe option when the article may
have been
downloaded 6 hours earlier?
If it hasn't changed, yes ;)
If it's a poppular article, probably not. But merging could wait until i
sit in front of a proper computer.
The more I think about the way the current merging algorithm works,
the more I think it's probably ok. Because if I'm not mistaken, the
system compares what you originally saw with what you're submitting
now, and applies those *changes*. So if the original text you're
modifying read like this:
John is happy. John is rich.
And you submit this text:
John is happy. John is extremely rich.
And meanwhile someone has modified the text thusly:
John is sad. John is rich.
Then the final text looks like this:
John is sad. John is extremely rich.
(though I think the actual granularity is much higher, like paragraph level).
So depending on the frequency of updates, this may be ok. Certainly I
edit many pages which don't receive as much as an edit a week, and the
few they receive are predominantly typos, interwiki links, categories,
new stub tags...
Steve