carolyn@usenix.ORG (Carolyn Carr) (02/28/91)
Dear USENIX Membership: You may be wondering where your January/February issue of ;login: is. No, the dog didn't eat it, but close. We just received notice that the Post Office Bulk Mail Department "held" (translate "didn't process") the sacks of ;logins: for up to 19 days. The issue "went out" February 20. The P.O. has yet to fess up and give us a reason. Unforgiveable. We apologize for this major slip in the U.S. mail system and stand forever vigilant. The issue is in the mail... Forget the dog, BEWARE OF P.O.! Carolyn S. Carr Publications Manager USENIX Association
gnn@minestrone.Berkeley.EDU (George Neville-Neil) (03/01/91)
In article <639@usenix.ORG>, carolyn@usenix.ORG (Carolyn Carr) writes: |> |> Dear USENIX Membership: |> |> You may be wondering where your January/February issue of ;login: is. |> |> No, the dog didn't eat it, but close. We just received notice |> that the Post Office Bulk Mail Department "held" (translate |> "didn't process") the sacks of ;logins: for up to 19 days. The |> issue "went out" February 20. The P.O. has yet to fess up and give us |> a reason. Unforgiveable. |> |> We apologize for this major slip in the U.S. mail system and stand |> forever vigilant. The issue is in the mail... |> |> Forget the dog, BEWARE OF P.O.! |> |> Carolyn S. Carr |> Publications Manager |> USENIX Association Yes, well if it helps your measurment of PO reliability I just got my ;login: yesterday (2/27/91). Of course I'm over in San Francisco so they could have walked it over to my apt. :-) BTW Now that postal rates have climbed is it possible to consider alternatives to Snail Mail ?? I personally don't know of any, but I am looking. Later, George George Neville-Neil What if they gave an orgy and nobody came ? gnn@mammoth.berkeley.edu From RFC 1196 The Finger User Information Protocol Vending machines SHOULD respond to a {C} request with a list of all items currently available for purchase and possible consumption. Vending machines SHOULD respond to a {U}{C} request with a detailed count or list of the particular product or product slot. Vending machines should NEVER NEVER EVER eat requests. Or money.
reggie@paradyne.com (George W. Leach) (03/02/91)
In article <11538@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> gnn@minestrone.Berkeley.EDU (George Neville-Neil) writes: >|> You may be wondering where your January/February issue of ;login: is. >Yes, well if it helps your measurment of PO reliability I just got my >;login: yesterday (2/27/91). Of course I'm over in San Francisco so >they could have walked it over to my apt. :-) I received my copy in Largo, Florida today (March 1, 1991), which isn't all that bad considering that the US Postal system is very slow getting mail from my family in New York and New Jersey down to here. George -- George W. Leach AT&T Paradyne reggie@paradyne.com Mail stop LG-133 Phone: 1-813-530-2376 P.O. Box 2826 FAX: 1-813-530-8224 Largo, FL 34649-2826 USA
acheng@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Albert Cheng) (03/05/91)
In article <11538@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> gnn@minestrone.Berkeley.EDU (George Neville-Neil) writes: >BTW Now that postal rates have climbed is it possible to consider >alternatives to Snail Mail ?? I personally don't know of any, but I am >looking. What about sending ;login: via Email to members? It can be in postscript or troff forms. Can we assume most, if not all, members have Email address and access to text processing tools? ========================================= Albert Cheng (acheng@ncsa.uiuc.edu) Research Programmer National Center for Supercomputing Applications University of Illinois
taylor@limbo.Intuitive.Com (Dave Taylor) (03/05/91)
Albert Cheng suggests: > What about sending ;login: via Email to members? It can be in > postscript or troff forms. Can we assume most, if not all, members > have Email address and access to text processing tools? An interesting idea until you think about the costs and complexities involved; with the number of members involved with Usenix, the email distribution could be quite prohibitive (e.g. thousands upon thousands of copies emailed at one time from the ole' Usenix machine) The alternative of having a "comp.org.usenix.login" newsgroup, moderated, with the moderator being the 'editor' of "login" is an interesting alternative, but 1. not everyone in Usenix gets Usenet (nor do they all have active email addresses, I'd guess) and 2. people would want to have followup discussion. Which would rapidly transform into "news.announce.conferences", "alt.books.technical", "comp.doc.techreports" and an occasional delve into "comp.os.unix" or similar. Which is to say... What *is* the purpose of "login" as it currently stands? Is it worth the time/effort/expense? Speaking for myself, it's been a long time since I've actually *read* an issue (because it's been a long time since there's been anything *to read* in the magazine). I've some further thoughts on this topic, but I'd like to hear some frank opinion from others on the net first... -- Dave Taylor Intuitive Systems Mountain View, California taylor@limbo.intuitive.com or {uunet!}{decwrl,apple}!limbo!taylor
watermaa@cs.Colorado.EDU (Alexander S. Waterman) (03/06/91)
Albert Cheng suggests: > What about sending ;login: via Email to members? It can be in > postscript or troff forms. Can we assume most, if not all, members > have Email address and access to text processing tools? Then Dave Taylor writes: >> An interesting idea until you think about the costs and complexities >> involved; with the number of members involved with Usenix, the email >> distribution could be quite prohibitive (e.g. thousands upon thousands >> of copies emailed at one time from the ole' Usenix machine) ... >> Which is to say... >> What *is* the purpose of "login" as it currently stands? Is it >> worth the time/effort/expense? >> Speaking for myself, it's been a long time since I've actually >> *read* an issue (because it's been a long time since there's >> been anything *to read* in the magazine). Could a possibility be to make ;login available by anonymous FTP at some site like usenix.com? Though not all people have access to the Internet, this could at least cut down on SOME of the *actual* mail traffic. Also, for those that don't read it, they just don't have to go and retrieve it. - Alex Waterman watermaa@cs.colorado.edu
marc@eamin.austin.ibm.com (Marc Wiz) (03/06/91)
Another reason to distribute ;login electronically is the paper it will save. IMHO it will be good for the image of Usenix not to say the industry if we do this. Marc Wiz MaBell (512)823-4780 Yes that really is my last name. The views expressed are my own. marc@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com or uunet!cs.utexas.edu!ibmchs!auschs!ekhomeni.austin.ibm.com!marc
preece@urbana.mcd.mot.com (Scott E. Preece) (03/06/91)
In article <1821@limbo.Intuitive.Com> taylor@limbo.Intuitive.Com (Dave Taylor) writes: | | Speaking for myself, it's been a long time since I've actually | *read* an issue (because it's been a long time since there's | been anything *to read* in the magazine). --- I don't understand the comment. Large parts of most issues are reports on what happened at USENIX workshops and meetings and reports on the POSIX and other standards meetings, both of which I find interesting and informative. Clearly you are looking for a different kind of reading than I am (in this newsletter). I just wish the snitch reports were more timely (I'd like to be able to read about the January POSIX meeting *before* the April meeting...) -- scott preece motorola/mcg urbana design center 1101 e. university, urbana, il 61801 uucp: uunet!uiucuxc!udc!preece, arpa: preece@urbana.mcd.mot.com phone: 217-384-8589 fax: 217-384-8550
de5@ornl.gov (Dave Sill) (03/07/91)
In article <1821@limbo.Intuitive.Com>, taylor@limbo.Intuitive.Com (Dave Taylor) writes: > >The alternative of having a "comp.org.usenix.login" newsgroup, moderated, >with the moderator being the 'editor' of "login" is an interesting >alternative, but 1. not everyone in Usenix gets Usenet (nor do they >all have active email addresses, I'd guess) and 2. people would want >to have followup discussion. For that matter, it could be posted right here. It's not that big. The problem, though, is deciding who to send the paper copy to. I suppose folks who didn't want the paper copy could send e-mail to usenix.org, but would that make too much work for someone? Then there's the question of whether we want to provide ;login: free to non-members. Personally, I wouldn't mind. It would provide some good PR for the organization, and membership would still have its privileges (Computing Systems, member discounts, etc.) -- Dave Sill (de5@ornl.gov) It will be a great day when our schools have Martin Marietta Energy Systems all the money they need and the Air Force Workstation Support has to hold a bake sale to buy a new bomber.
taylor@limbo.Intuitive.Com (Dave Taylor) (03/08/91)
Dave Sill resopnds to my note about "login": > For that matter, it could be posted right here. It's not that big. > The problem, though, is deciding who to send the paper copy to. Actually, since this isn't going to happen too fast, one possibility would be to include a box that people have to check on their membership renewal (or on conference registration forms) where they have to check off that they DO (or DON'T) want to receive "login" in printed form. It'd be VERY interesting to know how those numbers would come out... -- Dave Taylor Intuitive Systems Mountain View, California taylor@limbo.intuitive.com or {uunet!}{decwrl,apple}!limbo!taylor
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (03/09/91)
In article <PREECE.91Mar6100659@etude.urbana.mcd.mot.com> preece@urbana.mcd.mot.com (Scott E. Preece) writes: > I don't understand the comment. Large parts of most issues are reports > on what happened at USENIX workshops and meetings and reports on the > POSIX and other standards meetings, both of which I find interesting and > informative. I suspect that he's thinking of the days before Computing Systems was split off. A lot of the technical meat went over to CS at that time. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' peter@ferranti.com +1 713 274 5180. 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) (03/10/91)
IF ;login: were published electronically, what format would be best? My vote would be for troff (I believe it's all still set in troff, I could check), but I wouldn't be shocked if there were some other opinions on the matter. -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | bzs@world.std.com | uunet!world!bzs Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD
ables@lot.ACA.MCC.COM (King Ables) (03/11/91)
From article <BZS.91Mar9183937@world.std.com>, by bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein): > > IF ;login: were published electronically, what format would be best? That's the $64,000 question, isn't it? Plain text is the only rational answer (for everybody), I think. I know of sites that have whatever standard troff came with their machine, but since they don't have a CAT phototypesetter, it's useless to them (yes, they can nroff and print that... but that is about the same as plain text if you ask me...). I'd love to be able to say postscript, but I've been very disappointed with the (few) postscript previewers I've ever seen. Even then, you have to assume someone has a bitmaped display or a postscript printer. I think some people would be shocked at the "primitive" unix sites that are still around out there... ADM terminals and 68000 boxes... The only way to keep EVERYBODY happy is to use plain text... and these are the people who are even CAPABLE of receiving it, which isn't everybody. Someone else brought up a good point as well. Do we consider ;login a privilege of membership or is it public information. If it truly is to be viewed as public (and CS becomes the privilege of membership), then posting the nroff'ed version to the net seems reasonable. And people could check a box on their membership application/renewal that says whether a hard-copy mailing of ;login was necessary. This way, those who didn't have e-mail or news could still get it. Personally, I don't think there have been many cases of delays, this past one was kind of interesting, but it's not an on-going problem. Other than the amount of paper used, I don't see a need for a change (and I like to keep old issues anyway, and if I were to pitch them, I would certainly pitch them in the recycle bin). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- King Ables Micro Electronics and Computer Technology Corp. ables@mcc.com 3500 W. Balcones Center Drive +1 512 338 3749 Austin, TX 78759 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- We don't inherit the Earth from our parents, we borrow it from our children.
dvk@sei.cmu.edu (Daniel Klein) (03/12/91)
In article <2189@lot.ACA.MCC.COM>, ables@lot.ACA.MCC.COM (King Ables) writes: |> I know of sites that have whatever |> standard troff came with their machine, but since they don't have a |> CAT phototypesetter, it's useless to them (yes, they can nroff and print |> that... but that is about the same as plain text if you ask me...). Many versions of troff produce Postscript, which makes most of us happy, and for the rest, nroff will still produce the desired plain text. Since the troff source is in most cases available, I'd stick with the greatest common denominator. The big problem is the order forms (such as that published on pages 35-37 of the current issue). I would definitely favor an electronically available issue, though, perhaps posted to a suitable subgroup, such as comp.org.usenix.newsletter -- -- ============ -- =========== -- =========== -- =========== -- =========== -- "The only thing that separates us from the animals is superstition and mindless rituals". Daniel Klein CMU-SEI +1 412/268-7791 dvk@sei.cmu.edu
gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) (03/12/91)
Those of us who have been involved in typesetting troff documents to a variety of devices know that some device-dependent tweaking is often called for. I would rather receive the hard copy, thanks just the same.