jck@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu (Chuck Kesler) (06/01/89)
I'm an Amiga and ARexx owner, but I think that the use of comp.lang.rexx for posting Arexx scripts is quite inappropriate. The reasoning is quite simple: comp.lang.rexx is gatewayed into the Bitnet REXXLIST Listserv mailing list, and the traffic generated by the ARexx postings is not in line with the the subject matter that REXXLIST was started for, which was Rexx running on IBM mainframes, specifically IBM's running VM/SP. Now, keep in mind that I find Rexx extremely useful in both the Amiga and IBM worlds; in fact, Rexx is probably the only reason I ever got interested in VM in the first place. But, the traffic that could generated by posting multi-hundred line ARexx scripts to comp.lang.rexx and effectively REXXLIST cannot be justified. Bitnet is loaded down quite enough as it is, and the distribution of such large script files on a regular basis should not be happening, especially when those scripts are not directly related to the chief subject matter of REXXLIST. Also note that IBM Rexx scripts (EXECs) are very rarely posted to REXXLIST, and when they are, they are very short (read: < 100 lines). Therefore, I see no reason why ARexx scripts should be posted there either. I suggest that long ARexx scripts be confined to comp.sys.amiga and company. I recall someone making that comment that by posting ARexx scripts to the Bitnet mailing list might teach us IBM'ers a few things; well, true, there are many out there who could stand to learn a little more about other machines. But then, I think it would be better to post the ARexx scripts to comp.sys.amiga to teach all of you Amiga owners out there about just how powerful and flexible ARexx is! Seriously, go out and buy it, it's worth the $40... -Chuck VM Systems Programmer NCSU Computing Center All standard disclaimers apply
iphwk@TERRA.OSCS.MONTANA.EDU (Bill Kinnersley) (06/01/89)
[In "ARexx postings in comp.lang.rexx", Chuck Kesler said:] : : I'm an Amiga and ARexx owner, but I think that the use of comp.lang.rexx : for posting Arexx scripts is quite inappropriate. The reasoning is quite : simple: comp.lang.rexx is gatewayed into the Bitnet REXXLIST Listserv : mailing list, and the traffic generated by the ARexx postings is not : in line with the the subject matter that REXXLIST was started for, which : was Rexx running on IBM mainframes, specifically IBM's running VM/SP. : : -Chuck : VM Systems Programmer : NCSU Computing Center : All standard disclaimers apply : I believe your information about REXXLIST being intended solely for IBM mainframes is mistaken. Here is the official description of REXXLIST taken from the file LISTSERV.GROUPS at BITNIC: List: REXXLIST@UCF1VM Coordinator: LISTSERV Editor (EDITOR@UCF1VM) Peers: UGA THE REXX (STANDARDS) DIGEST: Discussion group for the REXX language, with an emphasis on coding standards. -- --Bill Kinnersley Physics Department Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717 INTERNET: iphwk@terra.oscs.montana.edu BITNET: IPHWK@MTSUNIX1 226 Transfer complete.
jck@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu (Chuck Kesler) (06/01/89)
In article <8905312036.AA29886@terra.oscs.montana.edu> iphwk@TERRA.OSCS.MONTANA.EDU (Bill Kinnersley) writes: >I believe your information about REXXLIST being intended solely for IBM >mainframes is mistaken. Here is the official description of REXXLIST >taken from the file LISTSERV.GROUPS at BITNIC: > > List: REXXLIST@UCF1VM > Coordinator: LISTSERV Editor (EDITOR@UCF1VM) > Peers: UGA > THE REXX (STANDARDS) DIGEST: Discussion group for the REXX language, > with an emphasis on coding standards. > Well, I'm not sure who thought up that, but I'm basing my statement on practice. Just about every posting to Rexxlist is VM specific. Also, every header comes with a From: name of 'VM/SP Rexx Discussion List' or some such (can't check exactly because our machine is down right now). The key there is the VM/SP. This is probably a problem that the people gatewaying Bitnet mailing lists and Usenet news should deal with. After all, if most people who read comp.lang.rexx are using Unix boxes, then they probably wouldn't care to read about VM specific Rexx issues. The gateway between comp.lang.rexx and Rexxlist is probably inappropriate. It would probably be better gatewayed with a comp.lang.rexx.vm. But then, the gateway doesn't work all of the time, so maybe the that point is moot. -Chuck
elg@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Eric Green) (06/02/89)
in article <3083@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu>, jck@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu (Chuck Kesler) says: > I'm an Amiga and ARexx owner, but I think that the use of comp.lang.rexx > for posting Arexx scripts is quite inappropriate. The reasoning is quite > simple: comp.lang.rexx is gatewayed into the Bitnet REXXLIST Listserv > mailing list, and the traffic generated by the ARexx postings is not > in line with the the subject matter that REXXLIST was started for, which > was Rexx running on IBM mainframes, specifically IBM's running VM/SP. Reminds me of the people who say things like, "Don't post C-64 sources to comp.sys.cbm! It overflows our ARPAnet mailboxes!". The Arexx people are posting their stuff to what they think is the most appropriate USENET group. Considering how little traffic there has been in this group, the fact that it is gatewayed to a BITNET group seems pretty irrelevant. USENETters shouldn't have to suffer for the poor software implementation of other message networks. -- Eric Lee Green P.O. Box 92191, Lafayette, LA 70509 ..!{ames,decwrl,mit-eddie,osu-cis}!killer!elg (318)989-9849 "I have seen or heard 'designer of the 68000' attached to so many names that I can only guess that the 68000 was produced by Cecil B. DeMille." -- Bcase