lyndon@ncc.UUCP (Lyndon Nerenberg) (09/15/86)
In article <684@mtuxt.UUCP>, dmt@mtuxt.UUCP (D.TUTELMAN) writes: > I'd be opposed (on purely self-interest grounds). > I have a login on a couple of UNIX hosts, have access to four or five > PC-compatibles, and never know when a generic (miscellaneous?) C or > Pascal program will turn up that I can use. Therefore, I'd have to read > all three groups. > > Of course, if there's enough sentiment in favor of splitting them, I guess > I WILL have to read all three groups. > > Dave Tutelman Am I missing something here? All the discussion going on about having to read multiple groups makes it sound like people have to move a 50 pound weight each time they switch groups... :-) If we have (a) net.sources.foo, (b) net.sources.bar, and (c) net.sources.bletch, you have a few options: 1) Subscribe to the group appropriate to your system ONLY, 2) Subscribe to more than one, based on some arbitrary similarities between the systems (e.g. foo and bletch are both 4.2), or 3) Subscribe to everything. Edit your .newsrc to place the net.sources.all groups together, in order of personal popularity, and just pretend you're reading net.sources... It's not as if you have to wade through three times as much material; The amount of material posted shouldn't vary *that* much with the addition of the new sub-groups. It *will* make life a bit easier for those people who are only looking for sources specific to whatever is appropriate to that particular sub-group. Digression: A nice trick I saw was to have at(1) do a readnews -ln <insert_favorite_groups> | mail me around 0730 or so. (I know - I don't have at(1) either (sigh)) -- Lyndon Nerenberg (VE6BBM) {ihnp4,ubc-vision}!alberta!ncc!lyndon Systems Group - A Div. of Nexus Computing Corp. Envoy_100: Unix
avolio@decuac.DEC.COM (Frederick M. Avolio) (09/17/86)
In article <2027@ecsvax.UUCP>, wab@ecsvax.UUCP (William A. Broom) writes: > > > > I think it should be much easier for rn-ers if we divide net.sources > > and net.sources into sub-directories. Any suggestions ? comments ? > I agree. I mostly scan net.sources for IBM-PC material > Dividing it into subdirectories would speed many of my readnews sessions. Why bother? 1) thingas are being reorganized anyway and 2) net.sources already has been broken up. There's a net.sources.d for discussions. You guys didn't use it. Why should anyone think that other subgroups would be used any better? (net.news.groups, by the way, is the proper group for such discussion with net.sources.d included.) -- Fred @ DEC Ultrix Applications Center INET: avolio@decuac.dec.com * Fight the Fight * UUCP: {decvax,seismo,cbosgd}!decuac!avolio * Rescue the Unborn *
ralphw@ius2.cs.cmu.edu (Ralph Hyre) (09/22/86)
In article <930@tekigm.UUCP> phils@tekigm.UUCP (Phil Staub) writes: >In article <2027@ecsvax.UUCP> wab@ecsvax.UUCP (William A. Broom) writes: >>> >>> I think it should be much easier for rn-ers if we divide net.sources >>> and net.sources into sub-directories. Any suggestions ? comments ? >> >> >> I agree. I mostly scan net.sources for IBM-PC material >>Dividing it into subdirectories would speed many of my readnews sessions. > > I agree. I mostly scan net.sources for *non*-IBM-PC material >Dividing it into subdirectories would speed many of my readnews sessions. 8-). > I agree. I mostly scan net.sources for <*sources*>, not discussion. Dividing it into subdirectories would speed many of my readnews sessions. IF ONLY POSTERS WOULD ADHERE TO THE GUIDELINES. Software fixes would help, among them: 1) don't let anything be posted and don't pass it on unless the text is in shar format. If people want the code badly enough they can port the unshar utility to their system, it's not hard. 2) add the field 'Followup-to: net.sources.d' in net.sources posting. -- - Ralph W. Hyre, Jr. Internet: ralphw@ius2.cs.cmu.edu Phone: (412) 268-2847 [CMU-BUGS], 268-3275 Amateur Radio: KA3PLY (c/o W3VC, CMU Radio Club) [packet mailbox coming soon!] Fido: Ralph Hyre at Pitt-Net [don't log in very often]
alex@xios.UUCP (Alex B Laney) (09/24/86)
I just wanted to mention that from the last list I read, net.sources is
going to become "comp.sources.unix." And there is no "comp.sources.pc."
As well, comp.sources.unix will become moderated. So sending dos source
to comp.sources.unix is going to be a mistake!
Based on this, I hope that a comp.sources.pc is created. ( Despite the
50 lb weight of changing between newsgroups. :-)
--
- + - + -
Alex Laney, Xios Systems Corp, 105-1600 Carling Av, Ottawa (613)725-5411x402
utzoo -
> !dciem
allegra!ihnp4!utcsri -- > nrcaer!xios!lib!alex
ucbvax!hplabs -- /
> !seismo!hadron!netex!prcrs/
decvax --bc@cyb-eng.UUCP (Bill Crews) (09/27/86)
> I just wanted to mention that from the last list I read, net.sources is > going to become "comp.sources.unix." And there is no "comp.sources.pc." > As well, comp.sources.unix will become moderated. So sending dos source > to comp.sources.unix is going to be a mistake! > > Based on this, I hope that a comp.sources.pc is created. ( Despite the > 50 lb weight of changing between newsgroups. :-) Well, me too. So I think those who agree should tune into net.news.group (I think and hope this is the right group) to voice their concern. -- bc Bill Crews @ NetCor Data International ..!{seismo,gatech,ihnp4}!ut-sally!cyb-eng!bc (512) 835-2937