rob@violet.berkeley.edu (Rob Robertson) (05/08/89)
When is C news being released? Netnews in the 1980's: USA, many | Rob Robertson at U of California, Berkeley releases; Canada, 0 releases. | rob@violet.berkeley.edu
badri@valhalla.ee.rochester.edu (Badri Lokanathan) (05/09/89)
In article <24133@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, rob@violet.berkeley.edu (Rob Robertson) writes: >Netnews in the 1980's: USA, many | Rob Robertson at U of California, Berkeley >releases; Canada, 0 releases. | rob@violet.berkeley.edu ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Give Canada 1/2 a release Henry Spencer's alpha release of C news last year (?) -- "I care about my fellow man {) badri@ee.rochester.edu Being taken for a ride, //\\ {ames,cmcl2,columbia,cornell, I care that things start changing ///\\\ garp,harvard,ll-xn,rutgers}! But there's no one on my side."-UB40 _||_ rochester!ur-valhalla!badri
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (05/10/89)
In article <24133@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> rob@violet.berkeley.edu (Rob Robertson) writes: >When is C news being released? It's about to go into beta test (no, we do not need testers -- this is going to be a restricted and fairly private beta). General release as soon as we're sure it works on a wide variety of systems. >Netnews in the 1980's: USA, many | Rob Robertson at U of California, Berkeley >releases; Canada, 0 releases. | rob@violet.berkeley.edu Don't you count our alpha release? It *did* work, albeit with quirks. Personally, I do not consider a steady stream of revised releases to be a good sign... :-) -- Mars in 1980s: USSR, 2 tries, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 2 failures; USA, 0 tries. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Rahul Dhesi) (05/10/89)
Just testing my own .signature, please ignore. -- Bizarre .signatures: USA, lots | Rahul Dhesi at Ball St U Computer Science of them; Canada, only one | iuvax!bsu-cs!dhesi dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu
bill@twwells.uucp (T. William Wells) (05/11/89)
Followups have been directed to comp.sources.d.
In article <1989May9.191034.3424@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
: Personally, I do not consider a steady stream of revised releases to be
: a good sign... :-)
Hooray!
I've become really disgusted with the amount of patching that goes
into some of the posted software. I would much rather wait for a
tested release than be the unintentional beta tester that many people
have become.
E.g., I would have brought up elm to replace mailx but there was
patch 1, patch 2, ..., patch 7! All in the space of a few weeks. It
might have been the case that elm would have worked fine for me but
this was *not* encouraging!
Please folks, if you have to release something that you don't *know*
is reasonably tested, note it as a beta. And tell us what *has* been
tested.
Please?
---
Bill { uunet | novavax } !twwells!bill