haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) (08/19/88)
In article <478@c10sd1.StPaul.NCR.COM> johnson@c10sd1.StPaul.NCR.COM (Wayne D. T. Johnson) writes: >OK, how about forming a list of these systems and all the information on >how to access them via UUCP. ... >If there is no list, I would ask anyone who has a working connection to >one of these, (please, no rumors about someone who knows someone, who knows...) >please EMAIL the pertinate info and I will compile and post these. some months ago bill wisner tried to create a newsgroup for the posting of archive site information. the vote failed miserably due to lack of interest. at the suggestion of certain backbone members, i have been posting my site's information on a regular basis. however, few other sites have followed suit and as a result there is still no easy way to locate a sources archive. how about creating a newsgroup for the sole purpose of posting archive information to? i am suggesting we create a new group, comp.sources.archives for the posting of archive site information. it can be an unmoderated group to make it easier for people to update their sites information, and discuss problems with using various archive sites. lets have two weeks discussion, which will hopefully be followed by a vote. i'll collect the votes if it ever gets to that point. -- jfh@rpp386.uucp (The Beach Bum at The Big "D" Home for Wayward Hackers) "Never attribute to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity" -- Hanlon's Razor
wilkes@mips.COM (John Wilkes) (08/20/88)
I like the idea. How about local groups? (e.g., ba.sources.archives for the
SF Bay area.)
-wilkes
--
-- work: {decwrl ames pyramid prls}!mips!wilkes -OR- wilkes@mips.comwoods@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu (Greg Woods) (08/20/88)
In article <362@pigs.UUCP> haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) writes: >[.... etc. ...] >how about creating a newsgroup for the sole purpose of posting archive >information to? i am suggesting we create a new group, comp.sources.archives >for the posting of archive site information. it can be an unmoderated >group to make it easier for people to update their sites information, >and discuss problems with using various archive sites. I like the un-moderated bit. Then I can post periodic listings from /usr/local/src, cause even though I don't actally "archive" the groups as such, I do collect fairly massive amounts of source (15 Mb online, currently). I wouldn't mind opening up my site for local distribution. I also provide an added benefit: Most of the stuff I have is in working condition. (Torontonians, take note.) I've always wanted to be able to get stuff from the archives, but I don't like paying long-distace phone bills, and the local site's around here either don't keep their working stuff up to date, or, they don't care to open up for distribution. -- Greg Woods. UUCP: utgpu!woods, utgpu!{ontmoh, ontmoh!ixpierre}!woods VOICE: (416) 242-7572 [h] LOCATION: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
greg@bilbo (Greg Wageman) (08/20/88)
In article <362@pigs.UUCP> haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) writes: > >how about creating a newsgroup for the sole purpose of posting archive >information to? i am suggesting we create a new group, comp.sources.archives >for the posting of archive site information. it can be an unmoderated >group to make it easier for people to update their sites information, >and discuss problems with using various archive sites. In all of the *moderated* comp.sources groups to which I subscribe, the moderator periodically posts information regarding submissions and archive sites. I have found a number of archive servers in this manner without difficulty. However, if others perceive a need for a specific place to post this information, such as for *unmoderated* groups, I would not object and would cast a "yes" vote, as these archive sites provide a very useful service to the net. Greg Wageman ARPA: greg%sentry@spar.slb.com Schlumberger Technologies BIX: gwage 1601 Technology Drive CIS: 74016,352 San Jose, CA 95110 GEnie: GWAGEMAN (408) 437-5198 UUCP: ...!decwrl!spar!sentry!greg ------------------ Opinions expressed herein are solely the responsibility of the author.
wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) (08/20/88)
In article <2852@electron.mips.COM> wilkes@electron.UUCP (John Wilkes) writes: > >I like the idea. How about local groups? (e.g., ba.sources.archives for the >SF Bay area.) No -- lets make this netwide. Nothing against local groups, but this would leave those in a lurch who have no archive site in their immediate neighborhood, or require wider distribution of local groups which tends to just add to the general confusion on the net. By having a netwide group, archive site admins would also have all the info in one place in case their site missed a specific item and needs to get it from one of the other archives. Wolf -- Wolf N. Paul * 3387 Sam Rayburn Run * Carrollton TX 75007 * (214) 306-9101 UUCP: killer!dcs!wnp ESL: 62832882 DOMAIN: wnp%dcs@killer.dallas.tx.us TLX: 910-380-0585 EES PLANO UD
bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells) (08/26/88)
In article <362@pigs.UUCP> haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) writes:
: lets have two weeks discussion, which will hopefully be followed by a
: vote. i'll collect the votes if it ever gets to that point.
You'll get my "yes" if it ever gets that far. It is very tedious
collecting the archive information from the various newsgroups
where it gets posted. But thanks anyway guys, its better than
nothing!
I'd suggest two groups: comp.sources.archives and
comp.sources.archives.d, the first for posting information on how
to access various archives, the second for discussion of problems
accessing archives (path xyzzy!abcd!foobar didn't work! Help!),
problems with archiving sites (I got bletch.Z from site glorch
and it wouldn't decompress!), archiving systems themselves (try
Bugaboo SW's archive server, wow!), and of anything else relating
to archives and archiving.
Alternatively, I'd suggest that there be an established way of
identifying which postings contained archive information (like a
specially formatted subject line) so that we can find the
information we want easily.
---
Bill
novavax!proxftl!billclarke@acheron.UUCP (Ed Clarke) (08/27/88)
From article <621@proxftl.UUCP>, by bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells): > In article <362@pigs.UUCP> haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) writes: > : lets have two weeks discussion, which will hopefully be followed by a > : vote. i'll collect the votes if it ever gets to that point. > You'll get my "yes" if it ever gets that far. It is very tedious > collecting the archive information from the various newsgroups Why don't you put archive information in the 'misc' section of your uucp map entry? If you use the keyword ARCHIVE, it can be searched with a perl script or even just grep. No moderator required and also no new newsgroup. Ed Clarke uunet!bywater!acheron!clarke
karl@romeo.cs.duke.edu (Karl Ramm) (08/28/88)
In article <231@acheron.UUCP> clarke@acheron.UUCP (Ed Clarke) writes: >Why don't you put archive information in the 'misc' section of your >uucp map entry? If you use the keyword ARCHIVE, it can be searched >with a perl script or even just grep. No moderator required and also >no new newsgroup. Because the group in question would also maintain records of ARPAnet anonymous ftp archives... also, not everyone faithfully saves a copy of the UUCP maps... They just remember where their nearest smart host is. Even so, putting whether you are an archive site in your UUCP map entry IS a good idea.. but it doesn't eliminate the need for a newsgroup. /*----- Karl Ramm ------------------------------------------------------------*\ |* This space intentionally left blank. Internet: karl@cs.duke.edu *| \*-------------------------------------------------- USENET: mcnc!duke!karl --*/
how@milhow1.UUCP (Mike Howard) (08/29/88)
How about archiving the archive info someplace and periodically posting a listing of the archive info listings and how to get them. The general idea seems to be to collect _all_ archive access information in one `location'. It should be a little more efficient to collect the actual information at an archive site(s) and periodically post (every two weeks?) information on how to get the archive info lists and what lists (with revision dates) are available. Archive maintainers would then mail their archive info to the archive site(s) - which (should be able to) can automatically generate the summary list. Summary list(s) would probably have to be mailed to some central distribution for reposting. Anyway, this list should be a short concise index to archive info. BTW, I would like that quite a bit better than having the archive info which I don't care about cropping up in groups I am reading for `content'. Are a there any groups which currently exist which would be suitable for such a list - such as `comp.newuser'? -- Mike Howard uunet!milhow1!how
tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) (08/30/88)
One question about comp.sources.archives: would archive sites be tempted
to post their entire file directory listings, with comments, to the group?
Would it be too much to carry if they did? Should postings be limited
to "I archive these newsgroups and RFCs"? Will users post numerous
requests for specific files ("has anyone got this" etc)? Should the group
be moderated for the foregoing reasons?
Okay, FIVE questions. :-)
--
Tom Neff UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff
"None of your toys CIS: 76556,2536 MCI: TNEFF
will function..." GEnie: TOMNEFF BIX: t.neff (no kidding)bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells) (08/30/88)
In article <231@acheron.UUCP> clarke@acheron.UUCP (Ed Clarke) writes:
: Why don't you put archive information in the 'misc' section of your
: uucp map entry? If you use the keyword ARCHIVE, it can be searched
: with a perl script or even just grep. No moderator required and also
: no new newsgroup.
I have no real idea of what you are proposing. However, if you
are supposing that there is something that uucp sites could do to
collect this information easily, you may be right, but this is
irrelevant. Just what fraction of the sites on Usenet do you
think are uucp sites? Judging by the posting volume, that number
might be very small. And in any case, a piecemeal solution to
the problem of finding archives is not going to very
satisfactory. (OK, you uucp sites do A; you bitnet sites do B;
you arpa ...). Far better for there to be a newsgroup.
---
Bill
novavax!proxftl!billsewilco@datapg.MN.ORG (Scot E Wilcoxon) (08/31/88)
In article <6146@dasys1.UUCP> tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes: >Would archive sites be tempted to post their entire file directory listings, >with comments, to the group? Would it be too much to carry if they did? If the list is 62K (500 files), a full list is no problem. For a large archive site, the question is relevant to this discussion. The UUNET archive list is 225K (1100 files) with no comments, with comments it should be twice its present size (it presently is in `ls -l` format). >Should postings be limited >to "I archive these newsgroups and RFCs"? Specialties might be newsgroups, hardware or software types, or other concepts (graphics, text, linear programming, etc). This is a good idea, so one has an idea of which archive sites might have something. >Will users post numerous requests for specific files ("has anyone got this" etc)? They're already posting (see comp.sources.wanted). Instead of posting, most will find an archive site and inquire there. The "netlib" server has a "find" command which can be used to search for searching a directory for strings. The "decwrl" server does not have such a capability (yet). I don't know of any string searching in `ftp`... >Should the group be moderated for the foregoing reasons? Managers of archives should be aware enough of the nets to restrain themselves in direct proportion to the size of their archive or posting. If a standard format is adopted for indexes, I'd prefer no centralized handling. There will be some "wanted" postings, but in general they should be reduced netwide by the ability to find archive sites (maybe I'll start reading c.s.wanted again when the volume drops :-). -- Scot E. Wilcoxon sewilco@DataPg.MN.ORG {amdahl|hpda}!bungia!datapg!sewilco Data Progress UNIX masts & rigging +1 612-825-2607 uunet!datapg!sewilco
haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) (08/31/88)
[ this article is being sent to news.groups for further discussion. it is just about time to decide what the proposed newsgroup is going to smell like ... ] In article <219@milhow1.UUCP> how@.UUCP (Mike Howard) (...!uunet!milhow1!how) writes: >How about archiving the archive info someplace and periodically >posting a listing of the archive info listings and how to get them. the problem which is trying to be solved is that people don't know where the archives are because there is no clear newsgroup or area for archive site information to be posted. >BTW, I would like that quite a bit better than having the archive info >which I don't care about cropping up in groups I am reading for `content'. i recently stopped cross-posting to comp.unix.xenix for my xenix-ported stuff for exactly this reason. i noticed many of the sites calling in weren't xenix systems so it seemed very pointless to continue bothering those poor xenix folks ... >Are a there any groups which currently exist which would be suitable for >such a list - such as `comp.newuser'? there is a news.announce.newuser newsgroup. not that anyone pays any attention to what is posted there ... news.lists could be used but it is moderated. dealing with moderated groups is a hassle. first you need a moderator ... -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-The Beach Bum at The Big "D" Home for Wayward Hackers-=-=-=-=-=-= Very Long Address: John.F.Haugh@rpp386.dallas.tx.us Very Short Address: jfh@rpp386 "ANSI C: Just say no" -- Me
bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells) (08/31/88)
In article <6146@dasys1.UUCP> tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes:
: One question about comp.sources.archives: would archive sites be tempted
: to post their entire file directory listings, with comments, to the group?
I hope so! The whole idea is to get the information needed to
find the stuff you want, in one place. It does me little good
for someone to say "I have all of comp.sources.whatever except
volume 3." How the heck do I know what *was* in that newsgroup?
: Would it be too much to carry if they did? Should postings be limited
: to "I archive these newsgroups and RFCs"? Will users post numerous
: requests for specific files ("has anyone got this" etc)? Should the group
: be moderated for the foregoing reasons?
My current proposal is for two groups: comp.archives and
comp.archives.d; the first being moderated and for information
about what is available in various archives and how to get it;
the second for discussion related to archives. See my message
<621@proxftl.UUCP>. I have also suggested that we might want to
keep an archive of the archive information. As I said earlier, I
might be willing to do this, or to moderate the comp.archives
group.
---
Bill
novavax!proxftl!bill