pete@violet.berkeley.edu (Pete Goodeve) (03/16/88)
Because of the uncertain status of comp.sys.amiga.tech, I've been cross posting my articles on IPC here as well as on .tech (where I think they properly belong). Other people have been doing the same thing, but someone has objected to this policy. My assumption is that people who receive .tech will follow the discussion more comfortably there, but those who don't will not be shut out. What do others think? Is anyone reading this stuff that can't get .tech? (Is anybody READING this stuff...?) Feedback please. Thanks. -- Pete --
kenchiu@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Kenneth Chiu) (03/16/88)
In article <7722@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> pete@violet.berkeley.edu (Pete Goodeve) writes: >My assumption is that people who receive .tech will follow the discussion >more comfortably there, but those who don't will not be shut out. What >do others think? Is anyone reading this stuff that can't get .tech? >(Is anybody READING this stuff...?) Feedback please. Thanks. I would appreciate it very much if people would cross-post. Why are people objecting? Is because they don't want .tech stuff cluttering up comp.sys.amiga? That's an interesting reversal of the original purpose of having two newsgroups. Ken Chiu
papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) (03/17/88)
In article <7722@agate.BERKELEY.EDU| pete@violet.berkeley.edu (Pete Goodeve) writes: | |Because of the uncertain status of comp.sys.amiga.tech, I've been cross |posting my articles on IPC here as well as on .tech (where I think they |properly belong). Other people have been doing the same thing, but |someone has objected to this policy. | |My assumption is that people who receive .tech will follow the discussion |more comfortably there, but those who don't will not be shut out. What |do others think? Is anyone reading this stuff that can't get .tech? |(Is anybody READING this stuff...?) Feedback please. Thanks. At this point is seems 100% certain that comp.sys.amiga.tech is a GO, with that name, so I myself will NOT cross prst. Bryce has given us some GOOD examples of what should be there and what should not. Also from a quick look at the path of the people that posted to comp.sys.amiga.tech, it is clear that it is already widely distributed. -- Marco
papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) (03/17/88)
In article <2075@phoenix.Princeton.EDU| kenchiu@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Kenneth Chiu) writes: |I would appreciate it very much if people would cross-post. Why are |people objecting? Is because they don't want .tech stuff cluttering |up comp.sys.amiga? That's an interesting reversal of the original purpose of |having two newsgroups. One of the reasons to have a new newsgroup, is to DECREASE the waste of net bandwidth. Cross-posting INCREASES the waste of net bandwidth. JUST SAY NO to cross-postings. If you want to read comp.sys.amiga.tech, add it to your .newsrc file, and tell your News administrator that you want to read it. -- Marco
dales@teksce.SCE.TEK.COM (Dale Snell) (03/17/88)
In article <7722@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> pete@violet.berkeley.edu (Pete Goodeve) writes: > >Because of the uncertain status of comp.sys.amiga.tech, I've been cross >posting my articles on IPC here as well as on .tech (where I think they >properly belong). Other people have been doing the same thing, but >someone has objected to this policy. > >My assumption is that people who receive .tech will follow the discussion >more comfortably there, but those who don't will not be shut out. What >do others think? Is anyone reading this stuff that can't get .tech? >(Is anybody READING this stuff...?) Feedback please. Thanks. > > -- Pete -- Pete, *Please,* keep cross-posting. As near as I can tell, the .tech group isn't real yet; certainly we don't have it here on teksce. From something Gene Spafford (sp?) said in news.groups, it could be months before every site on the net has .tech. Now, tektronix is a backbone site, so it should get it within about a week of its creation, but what about the rest of the folks? (Message propagation is weird; I see replys to messages, then see the original a week or so later.) Cross-posting also does not take up any more file space for those who already have .tech, so there is no harm in it. I really do read this stuff! I'm very new to the Amiga, so I haven't had anything to contribute to the discussion, but I find it fascinating. Only one point: Make the protocol general enough so that *anything* can be passed between programs. Perhaps the IPC could be used in the "workbench pipes" that are being discussed in another thread. --dds p.s. Gee, my first posting. Hope I didn't foul things up too bad. Now, lessee, I should have an appropriate signature... `````````````````````````````````````'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' "The trackdisk's track seeks to seek | Dale D. Snell dales@teksce.SCE.TEK.COM to Ami's request but Ami's request | UUCP-!: ...!tektronix!tekgen!teksce!dales seeks to seek the trackdisk's track | CompuServe: 74756,666 just one block per track per handle." | Disclaimer: *Wha'd* he say?? -- Matt Dillon
kenchiu@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Kenneth Chiu) (03/17/88)
In article <7693@oberon.USC.EDU> papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) writes: >In article <2075@phoenix.Princeton.EDU| kenchiu@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Kenneth Chiu) writes: >|I would appreciate it very much if people would cross-post. Why are >|people objecting? Is because they don't want .tech stuff cluttering >|up comp.sys.amiga? That's an interesting reversal of the original purpose of >|having two newsgroups. > >One of the reasons to have a new newsgroup, is to DECREASE the waste of net >bandwidth. Cross-posting INCREASES the waste of net bandwidth. Are you sure about this? I thought an article is transmitted only once regardless of how many newsgroups it's cross-posted to. Also, the news reader will recognize when you've already read an article, so it will be skipped if already read (at least rn does). Ken Chiu
jacobson@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu (03/17/88)
At our site here we don't get comp.sys.amiga.tech either so please keep
cross-posting. I want to get the group, but it has not reached our
machine yet. Hope it does. Thanks
*******************************************************************
* Russ Jacobson *
* 615 E. Peabody Drive *
* Illinois Geological Survey "THE MAD HACKER" *
* Champaign, IL 61820 *
* *
* 217-244-2425 *
*******************************************************************
_ __ __ __ _______ _
// //\ //\\//\\ || // //\
// // \ // \/ \\ || || // \
// //====\ // \\ || || ==\ //====\
\\ // // \ // \\ || \\______| // \
\\//
"MULTITASKING AND GRAPHICS POWER FOR THE REST OF US TODAY, NOT TOMMOROW"
*******************************************************************
* USENET: [ihnp4,pur-ee,convex]!uiucdcs!uiucuxc!uiucuxe!jacobson *
* ARPANET: jacobsonuiucuxe@a.cs.uiuc.edu *
* CSNET: jacobsonuiucuxe@uiuc.csnet *
*******************************************************************dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) (03/18/88)
:regardless of how many newsgroups it's cross-posted to. Also, the news :reader will recognize when you've already read an article, so it will be :skipped if already read (at least rn does). : :Ken Chiu Not everybody uses rn... I don't use rn (it's too slow for me). -Matt
ejkst@cisunx.UUCP (Eric J. Kennedy) (03/20/88)
In article <7722@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, pete@violet.berkeley.edu (Pete Goodeve) writes:
< Because of the uncertain status of comp.sys.amiga.tech, I've been cross
< posting my articles on IPC here as well as on .tech (where I think they
< properly belong). Other people have been doing the same thing, but
< someone has objected to this policy.
< My assumption is that people who receive .tech will follow the discussion
< more comfortably there, but those who don't will not be shut out. What
< do others think? Is anyone reading this stuff that can't get .tech?
< (Is anybody READING this stuff...?) Feedback please. Thanks.
< -- Pete --
Patience, .tech is coming, but it's not at many sites yet. If this
discussion is moved to .tech now, many people will not be able to follow
it. (Like me.)
--
------------
Eric Kennedy
ejkst@cisunx.UUCPchas@gtss.UUCP (Charles Cleveland) (03/27/88)
In article <7689@oberon.USC.EDU> papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) writes: >At this point is seems 100% certain that comp.sys.amiga.tech is a GO, with >that name, so I myself will NOT cross prst. Bryce has given us some GOOD >examples of what should be there and what should not. > >Also from a quick look at the path of the people that posted to >comp.sys.amiga.tech, it is clear that it is already widely distributed. If you look at the distribution paths and find sources widely dispersed it is only because sysadmins like me resolutely resolve not to drop groups just because we get mail from 'news' several times a week reminding us that we are carrying non-standard newsgroups (by name, with detailed instructions for dropping them [detailed, hell, you could practically feed the mail message directly into sh]). Many people are going to get tired of this onslaught and delete the groups, effecting everyone downstream. Like it or not, the backbone has power. Keep crossposting until the group becomes official. The idea you need may come from someone who can't get .tech. When .tech becomes official (which I too have no doubt of) the crossposting can stop. If this is not timely, I apologize -- I've been at a conference. -- -Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code.- Charles Cleveland Georgia Tech School of Physics Atlanta, GA 30332 UUCP: ...!gatech!gtss!chas INTERNET: chas@ss.physics.gatech.edu