mclek@dcatla.UUCP (Larry E. Kollar) (05/28/88)
[I'm cross-posting to comp.sys.amiga since this applies to amiga binaries as well.] To reduce the amount of binaries on the net, and to enhance the usefulness of what's posted, I propose the following scoring system: All submissions have a base score of 0. Sources accompany submission: +10 Public domain (as opposed to free copyrighted): +5 Binary < 20K: +5 Binary < 50K: +3 (a 10K binary has a score of +5, not +8) Binary > 100K: -3 Binary > 150K: -5 Shareware: -5 Demo of commercial program: -10 Each submission is given a score, and placed in the posting queue based on that score. The higher the score, the sooner it gets posted. Small things aren't clobbered nearly as often as larger programs, and programs with sources are much more useful, so we should encourage these submissions. Big shareware or commercial demos would most likely never get posted, due to things jumping ahead of them in line. The Mac and Amiga are hard enough to learn to program; the until-recent dearth of example Mac sources didn't help. These, of course, are rough guidelines; since moderators are intelligent humans, they can modify scores to their own tastes or for special considerations (if everyone is asking for it, it should be posted to reduce request clutter). On the other hand, people could port GNU CC to the Amiga & Mac, then we could do away with binaries entirely. :-) Well, what do y'all think? Larry Kollar ...!gatech!dcatla!mclek
sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) (05/29/88)
In article <5145@dcatla.UUCP> mclek@dcatla.UUCP (Larry E. Kollar) writes: >To reduce the amount of binaries on the net, and to enhance the usefulness of >what's posted, I propose the following scoring system: I hope no one takes this seriously. Sean -- *** Sean Casey sean@ms.uky.edu, sean@ukma.bitnet *** The Empire Definistrator {rutgers,uunet,cbosgd}!ukma!sean *** ``I'm not gonna mail it, YOU mail it. I'M not gonna mail it... Hey! Let's *** sent it to Rutgers! Yeah! They won't mail it! They return everything...''
jmpiazza@sunybcs.uucp (Joseph M. Piazza) (05/30/88)
In article <5145@dcatla.UUCP> Larry Kollar writes: >To reduce the amount of binaries on the net, What ever for? ... > ... and to enhance the usefulness of >what's posted, I propose the following scoring system: > > All submissions have a base score of 0. > > Sources accompany submission: +10 ... You seem to consider Sources intrinsically more valuable than Binaries. While I'm sure you have reasons, some true and good, it can't hold true for many situations. For one thing, this subject has been thrashed about many times in many news-groups and yet binarie news-groups still exist. The fact remains that sources are (usually) larger than binaries -- no savings here. Not everybody has the apropriate compiler/interpreter/assembler. Some people may have them but may not know enough to make everything work. A good example is if the user doesn't own the right brand compiler. This sometimes includes me. Do you know what that you would be saying to me? "Tough shit." >... programs with sources are >much more useful, so we should encourage these submissions. I do agree that sources c a n be more useful ... (hold this thought) >... Big shareware or >commercial demos would most likely never get posted, due to things jumping >ahead of them in line. There's smoething slippery about this idea. An unpredictable delay of a posting could deminish its usefulness. This could also cause a sufficietly delayed posting prove virtually useless and therefore a detriment -- but not dependent on the posting's own merit. There's no good in that. >... The Mac and Amiga are hard enough to learn to program; ... And some people don't program at all. (Remember that thought) Should we ignore non-programmers? >... >These, of course, are rough guidelines; since moderators are intelligent >humans, they can modify scores to their own tastes or for special >considerations ... I think it we would best leave it the hands of intelligent humans than to a non-thinking scoring scheme -- we're not playing Bridge. Flip side, joe piazza --- In capitalism, man exploits man. In communism, it's the other way around. CS Dept. SUNY at Buffalo 14260 UUCP: ..!{ames,boulder,decvax,rutgers}!sunybcs!jmpiazza GEnie:jmpiazza BITNET: jmpiazza@sunybcs.BITNET Internet: jmpiazza@cs.Buffalo.edu > Larry Kollar ...!gatech!dcatla!mclek
chip@vector.UUCP (Chip Rosenthal) (05/30/88)
In article <11637@sunybcs.UUCP> jmpiazza@sunybcs.UUCP (Joseph M. Piazza) writes: >In article <5145@dcatla.UUCP> Larry Kollar writes: >>... The Mac and Amiga are hard enough to learn to program; > ... And some people don't program at all. (Remember that thought) >Should we ignore non-programmers? Yes. -- Chip Rosenthal /// chip@vector.UUCP /// Dallas Semiconductor /// 214-450-0400 {uunet!warble,sun!texsun!rpp386,killer}!vector!chip I won't sing for politicians. Ain't singing for Spuds. This note's for you.
ain@s.cc.purdue.edu (Patrick White) (05/31/88)
In article <5145@dcatla.UUCP> mclek@dcatla.UUCP (Larry E. Kollar) writes: >[I'm cross-posting to comp.sys.amiga since this applies to amiga binaries >as well.] > >To reduce the amount of binaries on the net, and to enhance the usefulness of >what's posted, I propose the following scoring system: > > All submissions have a base score of 0. > > Sources accompany submission: +10 > Public domain (as opposed to free copyrighted): +5 > Binary < 20K: +5 > Binary < 50K: +3 (a 10K binary has a score of +5, not +8) > > Binary > 100K: -3 > Binary > 150K: -5 > Shareware: -5 > Demo of commercial program: -10 Just for the record, I AM NOT CURRENTLY DOING THIS.. that is, unless many people from the group or the demi-gods of the net want me to. Our official policy is still to post what is sent to us provided it works and is ok to post. A few things many are possibly not aware of though: a month or so ago, there was *much* discussion on the moderator/backbone mailing lists about possibly getting rid of the binaries groups all together. This discussion seemed to be prompted by the posting of some copyrighted software (or something like that) to the IBM BINARIES group [see how many idiots it takes to destroy a good thing?]. To my knowledge, nothing official has come of this.. yet. In view of this, perhaps it is time to start thinking of some sort of rating system for determining *usefulness* of a binary posting (most source is still useful as an example if nothing else). I, being a moderator, am in the position to enforce such a system [i'd really rather not judge programs, but if it must be...]. Since it would be more work for me, I'm not inclined to create such a rating system, but I will enforce one if asked. Generally speaking though, everybody includes source unless they have a very good reason not to (they want to keep control over the source to present a more consistent product, it's a demo version of a commercial program, etc.), so perhaps a voluntary constraint is enough. So, think about it, discuss it, let me know if any changes get decided upon. -- Pat White (co-moderator comp.sources/binaries.amiga) ARPA/UUCP: j.cc.purdue.edu!ain BITNET: PATWHITE@PURCCVM PHONE: (317) 743-8421 U.S. Mail: 320 Brown St. apt. 406, West Lafayette, IN 47906 ["how's it feel to be living in a black hole?"... "could be worse."]