karish@mindcraft.com (Chuck Karish) (11/27/90)
In article <1990Nov22.151938.17236@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: >You don't want to have postings going to sci.geo [since sci.geo.fluids >already exists], it breaks things like simple shell scripts to have a >group contain both postings and subgroups. Many groups, including the >one (comp.sys.amiga) for which I have taken charge of the >reorganization, are having to go back and undo that mistake by >establishing a .misc group; better by far to do it right in the first >place. Aren't there enough shell programmers reading this who know how and where to type 'test -d' that we can design the news hierarchy for ease of use rather than around a requirement that it be maintainable with completely trivial scripts? If I'm overlooking an intractable problem, please point it out to me. -- Chuck Karish karish@mindcraft.com Mindcraft, Inc. (415) 323-9000
ben@servalan.uucp (Ben Mesander) (11/28/90)
In article <659645056.29152@mindcraft.com> karish@mindcraft.com (Chuck Karish) writes: >In article <1990Nov22.151938.17236@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG >(Kent Paul Dolan) writes: > >>You don't want to have postings going to sci.geo [since sci.geo.fluids >>already exists], it breaks things like simple shell scripts to have a >>group contain both postings and subgroups. Many groups, including the >>one (comp.sys.amiga) for which I have taken charge of the >>reorganization, are having to go back and undo that mistake by >>establishing a .misc group; better by far to do it right in the first >>place. > >Aren't there enough shell programmers reading this who know how and >where to type 'test -d' that we can design the news hierarchy for ease >of use rather than around a requirement that it be maintainable with >completely trivial scripts? > >If I'm overlooking an intractable problem, please point it out to me. ALL THE WORLD IS NOT UNIX! ALL THE WORLD IS NOT UNIX! :-) Some of us don't have source to UUCP or News software, and we have binaries, not scripts. *I* personally don't have this problem, but much of my job involves these hideous old computers that are *not* UNIX machines, are *not* flexible, and do *not* have source available, and do not support C. Just a little consideration for those of us running on old backwards systems, please. It is a problem for some. > > Chuck Karish karish@mindcraft.com > Mindcraft, Inc. (415) 323-9000
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (11/28/90)
In article <1990Nov27.200339.29660@servalan.uucp> ben@servalan.uucp (Ben Mesander) writes: > Some of us don't have source to UUCP or News software, and we have > binaries, not scripts. [we're not as flexible] But the problem at hand (groups containing both articles and subgroups) can't possibly be a problem with these older systems or they'd be well and truly broken by now. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' +1 713 274 5180. 'U` peter@ferranti.com
ted@eslvcr.wimsey.bc.ca (Ted Powell) (11/29/90)
In article <HN97_06@xds13.ferranti.com> peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >In article <1990Nov27.200339.29660@servalan.uucp> ben@servalan.uucp (Ben Mesander) writes: >> Some of us don't have source to UUCP or News software, and we have >> binaries, not scripts. [we're not as flexible] > >But the problem at hand (groups containing both articles and subgroups) >can't possibly be a problem with these older systems or they'd be well >and truly broken by now. Ben's comment was indeed puzzling, for the reason you give. The first example that comes to mind, of course, is rec.humor and rec.humor.funny -- but there are in fact several right within the sci. hierarchy. The lines below are excerpted from my active file. The numbers are small due to a recent crash, but they show that there is non-trivial traffic in the "parent" group in each case. sci.bio 0000000149 00086 y sci.bio.technology 0000000009 00010 y sci.lang 0000000276 00228 y sci.lang.japan 0000000174 00097 y sci.math 0000000451 00277 y sci.math.num-analysis 0000000045 00033 y sci.math.stat 0000000036 00024 y sci.math.symbolic 0000000045 00030 y sci.med 0000000319 00092 y sci.med.aids 0000000028 00009 m sci.med.physics 0000000009 00006 y sci.physics 0000000394 00302 y sci.physics.fusion 0000000082 00058 y sci.psychology 0000000202 00147 y sci.psychology.digest 0000000006 00002 y sci.space 0000000518 00399 y sci.space.shuttle 0000000143 00096 y -- ted@eslvcr.wimsey.bc.ca ...!ubc-cs!van-bc!eslvcr!ted (Ted Powell)
news@fnx.UUCP (News place holder) (11/30/90)
In article <1990Nov27.200339.29660@servalan.uucp> ben@servalan.uucp (Ben Mesander) writes: (about the original problem, which is:) >>>You don't want to have postings going to sci.geo [since sci.geo.fluids >>>already exists], it breaks things like simple shell scripts to have a >>>group contain both postings and subgroups. Many groups, including the >binaries, not scripts. *I* personally don't have this problem, but >much of my job involves these hideous old computers that are *not* >UNIX machines, are *not* flexible, and do *not* have source available, >and do not support C. Just a little consideration for those of us >running on old backwards systems, please. It is a problem for some. Computers are for *people* to use. If the computer can't handle the job, it should be doing a different job, or relegated to the trash heap. How would you feel if I said "Hey guys, stop creating these newsgroups with long names! My hideous old computer can only have 6 character file names and these new groups are breaking my scripts"? Having discussion groups under the primary topic is so natural from a user interface point of view that it doesn't make sense to accommodate a few obsolete systems by removing an important feature. How do you deal with things like comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d? In other words, how would you deal with this: alt.cards.queens alt.cards.queens.d alt.cards.jokers alt.cards.jokers.d assuming the queens and jokers groups were moderated and the .d groups were for discussion? You would *not* want to have: alt.cards.queens alt.cards.jokers alt.cards.d since the discussion group would be all confused between jokers and queens. Trying to come up with some unique names for the discussion groups is just confusing to users. Heaven knows they are confused enough as it is! :-)
szabo@crg5.UUCP (Nick Szabo) (12/07/90)
In article <1990Nov27.200339.29660@servalan.uucp> ben@servalan.uucp (Ben Mesander) writes: >In article <659645056.29152@mindcraft.com> karish@mindcraft.com (Chuck Karish) writes: >> >>Aren't there enough shell programmers reading this who know how and >>where to type 'test -d' that we can design the news hierarchy for ease >>of use rather than around a requirement that it be maintainable with >>completely trivial scripts? >> >>If I'm overlooking an intractable problem, please point it out to me. > >ALL THE WORLD IS NOT UNIX! ALL THE WORLD IS NOT UNIX! > >:-) > >Some of us don't have source to UUCP or News software, and we have >binaries, not scripts. *I* personally don't have this problem, but >much of my job involves these hideous old computers that are *not* >UNIX machines, are *not* flexible, and do *not* have source available, >and do not support C. Just a little consideration for those of us >running on old backwards systems, please. It is a problem for some. > Make sure the news heirarchy can be punched out on cards too. :-) Seriously, at some point we have to balance current readership and functionality against additional readership. I don't functionality to suffer. -- Nick Szabo szabo@sequent.com "For historical reasons, this feature is unintelligible" The above opinions are my own and not related to those of any organization I may be affiliated with.