turner@imagen.UUCP (02/19/87)
After talking it over with Mark Horton and Gene Spafford we have
decided to create one or more moderated newsgroups for atari ST
software distribution. If anyone else has had plans to do this please
contact me by email, however we are pretty far down the road in the
process of creating these groups. The are still a few issues to be
resolved and in the name of creating as much net.confusion as possible,
I would like to open them up to some limited discussion (I say limited
because I would like to get this group started asap).
Issue One:
Should the group be named comp.sources.atari.st or
comp.atari.st.sources ?
(I think that this is a moot point and personally I am given to
flipping a coin to decide this one.)
Issue Two:
Should there be a seperate group for binary postings without
an accompaning source posting ?
(This is not a trivial problem: on one side there are the
arguements that blindly executing binary ONLY postings
can be dangerous to your system, also the purpose of the net
is to spread knowledge, what knowledge is gained from a binary
posting? On the other hand there are many authors who wish to
keep control over their sources for many good reasons (e.g.
ease of updates)
Issue Three:
If we decide to have a binaries group, in what form do we
distribute the binaries ?
(There are at least 5 different uuen/decode programs floating
around, most of which will not decode files encoded by all of
the others)
Issue Four:
Should we have a moderated ask-atari group ?
(I think some of the people at Atari were a little discouraged
by some of the flaming that they got on the net, possibly a
moderated 'pipe-line' for questions to Atari might be an
alternative)
Issue Five:
have I missed anything ?
I would like to get this started by the end of the month at the latest,
so let's settle issues one and two first.
I would greatly appreciate any positive suggestions etc. that people
might have on this subject, also helpful hints from other moderators
are gratefully (thanks Mark) accepted.
--
---------------
C'est la vie, C'est la guerre, C'est la pomme de terre
Mail: Imagen Corp. 2650 San Tomas Expressway Santa Clara, CA 95052-8101
UUCP: ...{decvax,ucbvax}!decwrl!imagen!turner AT&T: (408) 986-9400page@ulowell.UUCP (02/20/87)
turner@imagen.UUCP (D'arc Angel) wrote in article <882@imagen.UUCP>: > After talking it over with Mark Horton and Gene Spafford we have >decided to create one or more moderated newsgroups for atari ST Don't you just love anarchy? > Should there be a seperate group for binary postings without > an accompaning source posting ? Source or nothing; send binaries through the mail. > (There are at least 5 different uuen/decode programs floating > around, most of which will not decode files encoded by all of > the others) Then they ain't uu{en,de}code. > Should we have a moderated ask-atari group ? Get outta town. Have Atari set up a support group on BIX, Delphi or another COMMERCIAL service. Leave Usenet alone. > (I think some of the people at Atari were a little discouraged Phht. > have I missed anything ? Maybe the point of Usenet. Or are you talking about Stargate? ..Bob -- Bob Page, U of Lowell CS Dept. ulowell!page, page@ulowell.CSNET
ljdickey@water.UUCP (02/21/87)
> Should the group be named comp.sources.atari.st or > comp.atari.st.sources ? One reason to choose "comp.atari.st.sources": People interested in atari.st have fewer places to have to look, closer to home, so to speak. > Should there be a seperate group for binary postings without > an accompaning source posting ? > (This is not a trivial problem: on one side there are the > arguments that blindly executing binary ONLY postings > can be dangerous to your system, also the purpose of the net > is to spread knowledge, what knowledge is gained from a binary > posting? On the other hand there are many authors who wish to > keep control over their sources for many good reasons (e.g. > ease of updates) Right now, the number of items that are discussion far exceed the number of items that are either binary or source. I suggest that one group be created for the time being -- for both. Then, if that group gets too big, it can be split, into "sources" and "binary". > If we decide to have a binaries group, in what form do we > distribute the binaries ? I suggest that we allow the users to decide. The proliferation of variations of UUDECODE attests to the weaknesses of the original. Eventually the dust will settle on this one. > Should we have a moderated ask-atari group ? Sure. Good idea. -- Prof. L. J. Dickey, Faculty of Mathematics, University of Waterloo. ljdickey@water.UUCP ljdickey%water@waterloo.CSNET ljdickey%water%waterloo.csnet@csnet-relay.ARPA ljdickey@water.BITNET
grunau_b@husc4.UUCP (02/21/87)
In article <1073@ulowell.cs.ulowell.edu> page@ulowell.cs.ulowell.edu (Bob Page) writes:
... various obnoxious things.
Well, to throw my two-cents-worth in, I think it would be a distinct shame if
binaries were no longer distributed via usenet, though I strongly concur with
the opinion that such distribution should be carefully moderated. So far, we
have received N copies of a version of uniterm that was not only out of date
but did not have the permission of the author to be distributed; we have
received N revisions of "more", "bucket", "barrel", etc. in the space of just
a few days, and while I am very grateful for the fact that they have appeared
and have been so quickly revised and debugged, I think that the lag that
inevitably occurs with moderation would reduce the likelihood of multiple copies
of such things.
Also, although I think an "ask-Atari" moderated group is likely to be of little
or no use, I don't think it is necessary to respond that commercial services
are appropriate replacements for usenet. Any sort of knowledge dissemination
we can get out of usenet is good, as long as it doesn't become simply wasteful.
grunau@husc4.UUCP
or
--- !seismo-----
\
--- !rutgers----- !husc6!husc4!grunau
/
--- !decvax!ihnp4
or
For BITNET, I believe the hostname is "harvard".pete@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu (02/21/87)
Hi Y'all, Here is my vote for a separate moderated binaries newsgroup. My major reason for advising this is the plain cost of insisting that everyone post source code. Case in point: I am currently working on a UW (unix windows) client module for the ST. If there is enough interest in it, I'll post the binary. But I'm sure not going to post the source. It is big, and in Modula 2. If anybody wants it, I will be happy to MAIL it to them. Hopefully this group would eliminate UEMAIL type fiasco's. Pete. (pete@utcs) (* Note: UW availability depends on 1. my finishing the project, *) (* and 2. my talking to the original Mac author about permission *) (* to use his communications protocal. I will post when available*)
silvert@dalcs.UUCP (02/22/87)
In article <1073@ulowell.cs.ulowell.edu> page@ulowell.cs.ulowell.edu (Bob Page) writes: (I've left out most of the stuff to which he responded) >Don't you just love anarchy? There has been plenty of opportunity to comment on the proposal. >Source or nothing; send binaries through the mail. Sure. What language? If C or Pascal, which dialect? We're not talking Unix, where everybody has a full K&R compiler. >Then they ain't uu{en,de}code. The big problem in uuencoding is robustness, not compatiblity. >Get outta town. Have Atari set up a support group on BIX, Delphi or >another COMMERCIAL service. Leave Usenet alone. This is for us, not Atari. >Maybe the point of Usenet. Or are you talking about Stargate? Somebody sure missed the point. Maybe we need a comp.sys.atari.st.flames group just for you. -- Bill Silvert Marine Ecology Laboratory, Dartmouth, NS, Canada CDN or BITNET: silvert@cs.dal.cdn -- UUCP: ..!{seismo|utai}!dalcs!silvert ARPA: silvert%dalcs.uucp@seismo.CSS.GOV -- CSNET: silvert%cs.dal.cdn@ubc.csnet
silvert@dalcs.UUCP (02/22/87)
In article <1271@husc6.UUCP> grunau_b@husc4.UUCP (Justin J. M. Grunau) writes: >we have >received N revisions of "more", "bucket", "barrel", etc. in the space of just >a few days, and while I am very grateful for the fact that they have appeared >and have been so quickly revised and debugged, I think that the lag that >inevitably occurs with moderation would reduce the likelihood of multiple copies >of such things. When the size of these programs is compared with the ones that provoked the discussion (uemail and uniterm 1.6g) I don't see Braner's programs as posing much of a problem. The rapid feedback that UseNet provides is a real plus in the development of PD programs and should be encouraged. That is why I suggested that we focus on multi-part postings as the real targets. -- Bill Silvert Marine Ecology Laboratory, Dartmouth, NS, Canada CDN or BITNET: silvert@cs.dal.cdn -- UUCP: ..!{seismo|utai}!dalcs!silvert ARPA: silvert%dalcs.uucp@seismo.CSS.GOV -- CSNET: silvert%cs.dal.cdn@ubc.csnet
spaf@gatech.UUCP (02/23/87)
In article <882@imagen.UUCP> turner@imagen.UUCP (D'arc Angel) writes: > > After talking it over with Mark Horton and Gene Spafford we have >decided to create one or more moderated newsgroups for atari ST >software distribution. Let me clear this up a bit before anyone quick-to-flame starts up: Jim conducted the usual voting and solicitation for comments on this group about 6 months ago. He got in the neighborhood of 100 votes, plus some complaint that someone else was about to start a moderated group too. Thus, Jim waited. Then he waited for the confusion over newsgroup renaming to die down some. Now that things are semi-stable, he wanted to try again, especially considering the amount of Atari-related postings in other groups. He contacted Mark H. and myself for advice. We suggested that he post again to news.group and see if there were objections and/or suggestions. He's already had the votes, and the need and volume are certainly established. -- Gene Spafford Software Engineering Research Center (SERC), Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332 CSNet: Spaf @ GATech ARPA: Spaf@gatech.EDU uucp: ...!{akgua,decvax,hplabs,ihnp4,linus,seismo,ulysses}!gatech!spaf
john@viper.UUCP (02/23/87)
On the subject of source .vs. binarys:
Idealy I'd like to see both, but I understand that some people don't
want to distribute source (for some fairly good long-term reasons...)
If I have to choose between getting just a binary or getting nothing at
all, I'll take the binary. On the other hand, I'd prefer getting just
a binary to getting just source. The source does me -zip- if I don't
have all the necessary utilitys to turn it into a useable program.
My vote: 1st) Binarys and Source
2nd) Binarys
3rd) Source only.
For the current level of distribution, I see no reason for splitting the
sources and binarys onto two different areas. Although, it would be a
good idea to make them available in seperate articles so you don't -have-
to transfer both just to get one or the other.
As for a moderated Ask-Atari forum, I'm a bit skeptical. Whoever moderated
it (Atari?) would be able to limit the questions asked to ones they wanted
to answer. (There are -far- too many questions that currently have not been
answered or where the answers provided change with the season.)
On the other hand, I would like to see -any- involvement from Atari at all!!!
If providing a moderated area where they can provide answers in one place
once (rather than repeatedly as they would probably need to do here), is
what's necessary to get them back here, so be it!
---
John Stanley (john@viper.UUCP)
Software Consultant - DynaSoft Systems
UUCP: ...{amdahl,ihnp4,rutgers}!{meccts,dayton}!viper!johnatwell@utah-cs.UUCP (02/23/87)
In article <1987Feb21.001121.12535@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu> pete@gpu.utcs.UUCP (Peter Santangeli) writes: > ... I am currently > working on a UW (unix windows) client module for the ST. If > there is enough interest in it, I'll post the binary... > Pete. (pete@utcs) What exactly does UW do? Also, is there a possibility of running it on top of MINIX (once the port to the ST is done)? Bart atwell@utah-cs.arpa
rsweeney@dasys1.UUCP (02/24/87)
In article <1271@husc6.UUCP>, grunau_b@husc4.harvard.edu (Justin J. M. Grunau) writes: > Also, although I think an "ask-Atari" moderated group is likely to be of little > or no use, I don't think it is necessary to respond that commercial services > are appropriate replacements for usenet. Any sort of knowledge dissemination > we can get out of usenet is good, as long as it doesn't become simply wasteful. Instead of an "ask-Atari" newsgroup, how about Atari themselves setting up and moderating a MAILING LIST (which is what's supposed to happen before a new newsgroup is created, if I'm not mistaken) concerning these topics. This seems to be the appropriate solution, as the questions are being directed to a group of individuals on the same machine. Perhaps responses could be sent out in a digest format, similar to the Info-whatever digests found on the ARPAnet. Of course, this depends on whether or not someone at Atari wants to do it.... I see no philosophical problem with companies using the net to help support the users of their products, as long as they bear their fair share of net costs. If Atari's mail feeds began to complain about the load, Atari could always make alternate arrangements.. -- Robert Sweeney {allegra,cmcl2,philabs}!phri!\ Datamerica Systems {harpo,bellcore,cmcl2}!cucard!dasys1!rsweeney New York, NY. USA {philabs}!tg!/ "NO SLEEP 'TILL BROOKLYN!!"
pes@bath63.UUCP (02/24/87)
Ah. My preferred order of preference is: 1) Source and binary 2) Source only 3) Binary only There are several reasons for preferring source over binary. To answer the earlier objection first, I find that if the source is not in one of 'my' languages (C or assembler) I can usually manage a conversion. The advantages of source are several. First, I can see what the thing is really doing -- it does make me a bit uneasy trusting my system to a wodge of object that I know nothing about. Second, if there are problems, I can probably 'fix' them; or, if I want something similar but a bit different, I can bash them about. And finally (a personal preference, based on the way I relate to my machine) even if the program is not itself 'interesting' to me, I can probably learn a bit more about how the machine (or the world) works by looking through well-written source code.
appelbau@topaz.UUCP (02/24/87)
> Should we have a moderated ask-atari group ?
Atari has support groups on CIS, and GEnie. Having one on the Usenet
would only improve Atari's relations.
--
Marc L. Appelbaum "Insanity is just a state of mind"
Arpa: marc@aim.rutgers.edu Uucp:rutgers!ru-blue!appelbaumpete@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu (02/24/87)
In reference to what UW does.... UW is a communications and windowing protocal developped by for the MacIntosh (I am sorry, I am currently at work and do not have the authors name available. I will post later). UW works in two parts: A server working under UNIX on the "host" machine, and a "client" module on the mac (or st...). The client and server implement a small packet communications protocal which allows the client (st) to have up to 7 windows active, each with its own copy of csh (or whatever) running. Different terminal protocals may be used in each window, and all windows are COMPLETELY independant of each other. An interesting aspect of this (and my reason for implementing) is that by using "rlogin" one can have more than one UNIX machine feeding one st. Each machine in a different window. The ultimate in convenience. As for whether it COULD work under minix, Yes, it could. However one would have to have access to GEM, or a similar graphics environment. If one were to find out where GEM stores it's variables etc, would it not be possible to perform a "context switch" on it, and use gem for more than one app at a time? Or am I being COMPLETELY unrealistic... ANYWAYs.. most of the windowing stuff and grahics are finished on UW. All I have to do is finish the protocal implementation, and come up with some more terminal emulations (only glass tty right now...). One other thing that remains is implementing the .rsc file for menus. I have no resource compiler, so this is a problem. Can anyone help out? Thanks, Pete Santangeli pete@utcs
neil@atari.UUCP (02/24/87)
> > Should we have a moderated ask-atari group ? > > Get outta town. Have Atari set up a support group on BIX, Delphi or > another COMMERCIAL service. Leave Usenet alone. Gee, last time I looked there *was* an Atari support group on BIX, and more recently we joined GEnie as well. Not to mention our own BBS, which we've been running here for 1.5 years now. On BIX, join ataricorp to be part of our own conference (along with myself, Jim Tittsler of our engineering dept., Alex Leavens of Tech Support, John Jainschigg of Atari Explorer, and more. On GEnie, join the Atari ST roundtable. The BBS is accessed by calling 408-745-5308. Speaking of the BBS, we are in the midst of some massive maintenance. Our software download area has just hit the maximum of 16 megabytes, and now we're ARCing some files and will probably eliminate some others. James Turner of Imagen has copies of the entire set as of a few weeks back, for you Netlanders. If anyone needs detailed signup instructions for BIX or GEnie (including a special no-signup-fee GEnie offer), look on the BBS in the "news" section. If allowed I could also post the info here. One last thing. I am working on an article which clears up a lot of the misinformation on the status of current and forthcoming products. This will be ready later in the week, and will be posted here and sent to our dealers. In the meantime, the rampant speculation doesn't seem to be doing anyone a lot of good. OK? -- --->Neil @ Atari ...{hoptoad, lll-lcc, pyramid, imagen, sun}!atari!neil BIX: neilharris CIS: 70007,1135 Delphi: NEILHARRIS GENIE: nharris WELL: neil Atari Corp. BBS 408-745-5308
manis@ubc-cs.UUCP (02/24/87)
Can I make a radical suggestion about posting of programs? There should be two acceptable forms: either source code (in any of a reasonably long list of languages) or binaries+documentation? (Of course, source+documentation is probably ok too!). This business of "here's an interesting d.a.; try it" tends to make me skip postings, not only here but in other newsgroups. Before I run something, I want to know what it does, what effects it might have on my system, and what limitations it might have. I'm not looking for elaborate documentation. Just a simple statement of how to use it (UNIX man page format would be fine), in a form that can be viewed via LESS or printed, would be great. It might be argued that this policy might restrict postings; however, I suspect that the people who do all this wonderful programming would be more than happy to take the extra time to document their programs, if it results in wider use.
nick@utcsscb.UUCP (02/25/87)
In article <1987Feb24.104906.29404@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu> pete@gpu.utcs.UUCP (Peter Santangeli) writes: > > In reference to what UW does.... > > UW is a communications and windowing protocal developped by for >the MacIntosh (I am sorry, I am currently at work and do not have the >authors name available. I will post later). > UW works in two parts: A server working under UNIX on the "host" >machine, and a "client" module on the mac (or st...). The client and server >implement a small packet communications protocal which allows the client (st) >to have up to 7 windows active, each with its own copy of csh (or whatever) >running. Different terminal protocals may be used in each window, and all >windows are COMPLETELY independant of each other. > An interesting aspect of this (and my reason for implementing) is >that by using "rlogin" one can have more than one UNIX machine feeding >one st. Each machine in a different window. The ultimate in convenience. > As for whether it COULD work under minix, Yes, it could. However >one would have to have access to GEM, or a similar graphics environment. >If one were to find out where GEM stores it's variables etc, would it not >be possible to perform a "context switch" on it, and use gem for more than >one app at a time? Or am I being COMPLETELY unrealistic... > ANYWAYs.. most of the windowing stuff and grahics are finished on >UW. All I have to do is finish the protocal implementation, and come up >with some more terminal emulations (only glass tty right now...). One other >thing that remains is implementing the .rsc file for menus. I have no >resource compiler, so this is a problem. Can anyone help out? > > Thanks, > Pete Santangeli > pete@utcs I think the question was if the Unix server could run under Minix NOT if the other end runs on the Atari. EEsh programs who can't read . Nick
gordon@sage.UUCP (02/25/87)
In article <796@water.UUCP> ljdickey@water.UUCP (Lee Dickey) writes:
etc. etc. etc.
Either way, get some sort of extra group going, I don't care if we have
one for sources and one for binaries, or combined, or moderated.
Whatever it is, it'l be better than nothing, and will stop most of this talk.appelbau@topaz.UUCP (02/26/87)
Neil Harris writes:
On GEnie, join the Atari ST roundtable.
Well that's all well and good, but what about support for the 8-bits.
When Neil first introduced Alex Leavens he said that Alex knew about
the 8bit. From what I've seen on the net and GEnie, ATARI is only
supporting the ST line.
So when are we going to see some real support for the 8-bits???
--
Marc L. Appelbaum "Insanity is just a state of mind"
Arpa: marc@aim.rutgers.edu Uucp:rutgers!ru-blue!appelbaum
GEnie:M.APPELBAUMturner@imagen.UUCP (02/28/87)
in article <863@ubc-cs.UUCP+, manis@ubc-cs.UUCP (Vincent Manis) says:
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Can I make a radical suggestion about posting of programs? There should be
+ two acceptable forms: either source code (in any of a reasonably long list
+ of languages) or binaries+documentation? (Of course, source+documentation
+ is probably ok too!).
+
+ This business of "here's an interesting d.a.; try it" tends to make me skip
+ postings, not only here but in other newsgroups. Before I run something, I
+ want to know what it does, what effects it might have on my system, and what
+ limitations it might have.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I intend to test every program that gets submitted to me. (anyone
who wipes my hard disks dies !!!) and add documentation when ever it
is necessary. I consider it one of my duties as moderator.
--
---------------
C'est la vie, C'est la guerre, C'est la pomme de terre
Mail: Imagen Corp. 2650 San Tomas Expressway Santa Clara, CA 95052-8101
UUCP: ...{decvax,ucbvax}!decwrl!imagen!turner AT&T: (408) 986-9400neil@atari.UUCP (03/03/87)
In article <9650@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU>, appelbau@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Marc L. Appelbaum) writes: > Well that's all well and good, but what about support for the 8-bits. > When Neil first introduced Alex Leavens he said that Alex knew about > the 8bit. From what I've seen on the net and GEnie, ATARI is only > supporting the ST line. > > So when are we going to see some real support for the 8-bits??? You asked for it... Just a few hours ago, I talked to Alex about 8-bit support. He will be spending quite a bit of time in the GEnie 8-bit conference (called "ATARI"). It will take him a little while to wade through all the messages there already, but expect to see his presence there on a daily basis. A further note. I had a meeting last week with TOP management here at Atari. The topic was also 8-bit support, including ways to get software produced by outside companies and how to get better presence for 8-bit software. The subject has yet to be concluded, but we are coming up with some good ideas. -- --->Neil @ Atari ...{hoptoad, lll-lcc, pyramid, imagen, sun}!atari!neil BIX: neilharris CIS: 70007,1135 Delphi: NEILHARRIS GENIE: nharris WELL: neil Atari Corp. BBS 408-745-5308
leavens@atari.UUCP (03/05/87)
in article <9650@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU>, appelbau@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Marc L. Appelbaum) says: > Cc: appelbau > > So when are we going to see some real support for the 8-bits??? I'm now doing support for the 8-bits on GEnie as well. Took me a little while.... (Had to wade through like 5 zillion messages... <grin>) --alex @ Atari BIX: alexl. GEnie: ALEXLEAVENS AtariCorp: 408-745-2006
store2@ihuxi.UUCP (03/09/87)
In article <591@atari.UUCP>, leavens@atari.UUCP (Alex Leavens) writes: > in article <9650@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU>, appelbau@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Marc L. Appelbaum) says: > > Cc: appelbau > > > > > So when are we going to see some real support for the 8-bits??? > > I'm now doing support for the 8-bits on GEnie as well. Took me a little > while.... (Had to wade through like 5 zillion messages... <grin>) > > --alex @ Atari I'd like to add my thanks to the many you are probably already receiving from us 8-bit users. When replying to articles like this, please be sure that comp.sys.atari.8bit also gets a copy. Not all of us read the ST group. Kit Kimes AT&T--Information Systems Labs ...ihnp4!iwvae!kimes "I'm carrying the weight of all the useless junk a modern man accumulates. I'm a statistic in a system that a civil servant dominates." _Running On Ice_ -Billy Joel