rja@edison.cho.ge.com (rja) (08/13/90)
A month or so back there was some formal discussion about renaming comp.binaries.ibm.pc to be comp.binaries.msdos and at the same time renaming comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d to be comp.binaries.msdos.d Originally this was proposed as part of a package that included creating equivalent comp.sources.* groups for MSDOS and OS/2, but it seems opportune to at least rename these two groups to be consistent with the rest of the IBM PC newsgroups and comp.binaries.os2 which already exists. I've talked with the current moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc (Bill Davidsen) and he has indicated that he doesn't object to the renaming of the group. The sources groups never had any opposition, but neither did they have a strong following. I'd like to propose that if the comp.binaries.windows thing ever comes to a vote, that the proposal below be handled as part of the same voting cycle but as an independent yea/nay item. Formal Proposal: old name: comp.binaries.ibm.pc comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d new name: comp.binaries.msdos comp.binaries.msdos.d Discussion of this idea should appear in news.groups only. -- ______________________________________________________________________________ Internet (vastly preferable) : rja@edison.CHO.GE.COM UUCP (if you've got no choice): ...uunet!virginia!edison!rja ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu (Tom Haapanen) (08/14/90)
rja <rja@edison.cho.ge.com> writes: > Formal Proposal: > old name: comp.binaries.ibm.pc comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d > new name: comp.binaries.msdos comp.binaries.msdos.d Can we also add to the vote, when it comes to that: new group: comp.binaries.mswindows There has been quite a bit of discussion about this in comp.windows.ms, and far too many binaries floating through that group. Of course we'll need a moderator first, though. [ \tom haapanen --- university of waterloo --- tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu ] [ "i don't even know what street canada is on" -- al capone ]
floyd@starsend.UUCP (Floyd Miller) (08/15/90)
In article <1990Aug6.175005.25909@edison.cho.ge.com> rja@edison.cho.ge.com (rja) writes: > A month or so back there was some formal discussion about renaming > comp.binaries.ibm.pc to be comp.binaries.msdos and at the same time > renaming comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d to be comp.binaries.msdos.d > ... > Discussion of this idea should appear in news.groups only. Well I, for one, do not subscribe or even receive news.groups so I hope any serious discussion would appear in comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d as well as in news.groups. At least any announcement of voting and certainly an announcement of any name change so I can have my news feed modified in time not to miss any postings. Thanks. -- ******* ******************************************* ***** ******************************** Floyd Miller *** ************** floyd@starsend.UUCP * ******** floyd%starsend@PRC.Unisys.com ** starsend!floyd@burdvax.PRC.Unisys.com *
andy@mks.com (Andy Toy) (08/15/90)
phoenix@ms.uky.edu (R'ykandar Korra'ti) writes: >rja <rja@edison.cho.ge.com> writes: >>Formal Proposal: >>old name: comp.binaries.ibm.pc comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d >>new name: comp.binaries.msdos comp.binaries.msdos.d > I think this makes a lot of sense. After all, more non-IBM machines >run MS-DOS than IBM machines do; and once (and assuming) that OS/2 starts >moving along, the current group names would be confusing to the first-time >user. Agreed. comp.binaries.ibm.pc is too ambiguous since there could be binaries for DOS, OS/2, AIX, UNIX, Minix, Coherent, MS-Windows, etc... All of these OS run on IBM PC/AT/XT/RT. Almost all of the postings are not even IBM PC specific (i.e. they will run on most MS-DOS machines). I think that naming the group along OS lines is better than by company and product name in this case. Also there has been mention in comp.windows.ms about MS-Windows binaries. Discussing creation of comp.binaries.mswindows may also be appropriate at this time. -- Andy Toy, Mortice Kern Systems Inc., Internet: andy@mks.com 35 King Street North, Waterloo, UUCP: uunet!watmath!mks!andy Ontario, CANADA N2J 2W9 Phone: 519-884-2251 FAX: 519-884-8861
davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) (08/16/90)
In article <0036@starsend.UUCP> floyd@starsend.UUCP (Floyd Miller) writes: | At least any announcement of voting and certainly an announcement of | any name change so I can have my news feed modified in time not to | miss any postings. Let's not make any rash assumptions that this is going to pass. Actually renaming a group seems like a good way to kill it in general, like mod.gourmet (or whatever it was called). This seems like a lot of work, time to generate propigation, etc. If the group was grossly misnamed I could really be in favor of it, but it's more "out of style" than in the wrong place. You will also need a discussion group. I'm not sure I sense any groundswell for doing this, perhaps it was just a moment's thought. I'd rather think about comp.os.msdos.doc (mod) where some of the useful doumentation could be posted. -- bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen) "This is your PC. This is your PC on OS/2. Any questions?"
kjh@pollux.usc.edu (Kenneth J. Hendrickson) (08/19/90)
Why is there no comp.sources.msdos or comp.sources.ibm.pc ? By the way, I like the idea of a name change from comp.binaries.ibm.pc to comp.binaries.msdos. -- Ken Hendrickson N8DGN/6 kjh@usc.edu ...!uunet!usc!pollux!kjh