[seqfan] Re: Changing sequences without asking authors

[Russ Cox]

On Nov 28, 2010 9:20 AM, "Alexander P-sky" <apovolot at gmail.com> wrote:
> Maintaining the file "modified.txt" (in addition to restoring file
> "recent.txt") would help to spot issues like this.
> Also would it be better to use keyword "modified" for the cases of
> edited sequences, similar to such (instead of using keyword "new") for
> edited sequences (proposed here by me to be captured in the file
> "modified.txt"), while keeping keyword "new" to be applied only to
> "brand new" sequences" (proposed here by me to be captured in the
> restored file "recent.txt") ?

You can visit http://oeis.org/history/approved to see recent changes.
There is no need for separate text files, and they would always be
out of date.  When things settle down I have considered adding an
RSS feed.

> Also would it be helpful if when editing of sequence is "proposed",
> then OEIS would automatically issue the notification email to the
> author of the sequence ?

The OEIS sends a notification email when the changes are
published.  It is not hard to click the link and see what the
changes are.  I refrained from sending mail on every edit
because they often happen very quickly back to back.

Russ