[news.sysadmin] Sources, Moderated groups, and decussions thereof

rwhite@nu3b2.UUCP (Robert C. White Jr.) (07/11/87)

Everyone has bin comenting on moderated source groups ad nausium.  This
Is a copy of something I posted off the top of my head without including
the approprate "other groups" so here it is where it might count.

I havent changet the text so pardon the typos and miss spellings.

All coments wanted! I will provide a sumary of mailed responses.


	It seemes to me that the problem is not being approached correctly
from the start.  After a few minutes of consideration I have come up with
a change that, though massive in scope, would solve the problem forever.

Leve the talkies in the surces groups.  Where else would a normal descussion
about a posted source belong?  Many individuals who might need the 
comentary might never find it if it were religated into some net.hell.
Rather than be moderated groups, a pair of informative hedders could be
introduced into the standard.

1) Sources and Binaries would be "attached" to messages rather than in
them.  This would be done by a headder line very similar to the Refferences:
line.  The presence of one or more "Source: <####@foo.UUCP>" or
"Binary: <####@foo.UUCP>" in the text message would indicate the presence
of that/those "Control: Source" or "Control: Binary" messages listed.

2) Any "Control: Source" or "Control: Binary" message received by a
system would drop the control message into the newsdir/control/source
or newsdir/control/binary directories [which usually are not read by
news users]

3) Any followup or response to a message will contain the
"Source: <####@foo.UUCP>" and "Binry: <####@foo.UUCP>" from the original.

4) The .newsrc file will contain a list or range of "read" sources and
binaries

5) When the reader comes to a message which refers to an "unread" source
or binary they get a "Source/Binary attached: Retreive?" message prompt.

6) any time any "Source:" or "Binary:" message arives the "Expire:" date
for the "Control: Source" or "Control: Binary" message is reset to the
larger of a) the present "Expire:" of the control message.  b) the
"Expire:" date of the new article.  c) The implied experaation date
of the new posting.
	This assures that a copy of the source or binary is available
on any machine for as long as, but only for as long as, the intrest
in the peice lasts.  The adminstrator may remove any unwanted source
or binary simply by removing the "Control: Source" or "Control: Binary"
message.  All related Sources and Patches would be grouped by the 
subsiquent additions of "Source:" and "Binary:" headers to the replys.

7) Postnews would ask "Attach Source?" for any posting to a group with
"source" in the group name, likewise for Binaries.

8) "Control: Source" and "Control: Binary" messages would have a simple
checksum [Making the message actually "Control: Source ####"] which
would add an accuracy check to the transmittion and discourage the
spontaionus, often stupid, freedom-of-speach-disertations so common.

9)  The absence of newsdir/control/sources or newsdir/control/binaries
would caues the sources and/or binaries to be silentley disposed of
on systems that don't want sources or binaries at all.

	This mechanisim would be transparent to the user, who would
still be able to talk to his hearts content about his favorite source.
It would cut down on the "Could You Send Me That Again?" messages.
Each source could be "Control: Cancel <####@foo.UUCP>"ed  without
affecting the messaage chain.  Any non-transmitted/undesired sources
and binaries from groups which are not forwarded would silently
disapear if the people discussing the source did so only in the
unwanted groups.  Source text would not flail it's way through the
system.

NOTE: Shell archiving multiple files could by USED or NOT USED at the
descretion of the poster [NOT USED would be best so that updates to
one module need not retrnsmit the entire archive] and the 
"- - - - - - - - CUT HERE - - - - - - - - -" could be disposed of.

Since the sources and binaries are seperate, the archivers would not have
any problems keeping them.

Those who are only intrested in the "New-to-them" Sources could simply
"next" through the group until they received the "Unread Source" message
in the group, or an extension program or option could simply and easily
do the extract.


This IS what EVERYONE is after..... n'cest pa? :-)

Robert.

Disclaimer:  My mind is so fragmented by random excursions into a
	wilderness of abstractions and incipient ideas that the
	practical purposes of the moment are often submerged in
	my consciousness and I don't know what I'm doing.
		[my employers certainly have no idea]