First, Overdoze posted something relevant in this thread, namely:
So why are original installer media an absolute requirement for software from the 70's, 80's and early 90's? Considering that we already forbid shareware and freeware, this already reduces the amount of software from the time period we'd accept considerably, so I see no need for additional constraints. Consider that a pre-installed copy might well be the only thing that's left of such an old commercial product. We already allow pre-installed copies of beta's, so why not extend this to abandonware up to, say, 1995?The more likely reason as to why these builds are rare nowadays is that they're, well... old. And the older something gets, the more likely it is someone will throw it away or it'll eventually deteriorate beyond recovery. Most software from the 80s is rare now because not many people still keep working 30+ year old installation disks (often in long obsolete formats too) around.
Though of course, there is the risk of that causing an onslaught of bad uploads (fakes, hacks, and so on). Maybe splitting the queue into fast lane (for proper copies of stuff) and slow lane (for less proper copies where even identification might require more work) would be a good idea.
Second, why do CD (and DVD) images have to be MDF+MDS, even for unprotected media? We consider IMG good enough for floppies unless the floppies are such that storing them in such a format would cause loss of information, so why don't we apply the same standard to CD's? It would make it easier for people to upload their collections, and reduce the amount of disk space used by the FTP - not only because ISO's are smaller per se (though CUE+BIN are not) but also because uncompressed formats deduplicate better. Of course, copy-protected discs would still require MDF+MDS, but otherwise, the acceptable formats would depend on the type of disc, which by the way is a position supported by professional archivists.
My proposal would be to allow ISO for non-copy-protected data-only discs, and require MDF+MDS for everything else (maybe optionally allowing something like CUE+BIN for non-copy+protected discs with audio, but requiring MDF+MDS for those would not be that bad).
I understand the argument that there is already a lot of stuff to process and that this might increase the workload further, however, the current requirements actually get in the way of processing stuff. I have been downloading a considerable amount of stuff from the processing queue and for most of it, I'm not even sure what to do with it, since I'll honestly admit I'm not quite sure sure anymore what kind of stuff is accepted (other than the basic requirements) and what exceptions exist for what.
I believe that if we had simpler, easier to follow requirements, that also uniformly applied to everything, it would make processing things easier, and make more people willing to help.
I do realize that the current FTP requirements have arised out of a need to sort out the mess that the FTP once was and that they have been set up with the best intentions, but they have unfortunately grown to become detrimental, rather than beneficial, to BetaArchive, so I feel it's time a discussion is held in order to bring about FTP requirements that are beneficial.
Edit: To make it clear, the main purpose of this thread is to expose some of what I think are issues with the FTP requirements and, most importantly, to see what the rest of the members think.
.
