steve@groucho.ucar.edu (Steve Emmerson) (11/28/89)
jtc@wimsey.bc.ca writes: >RENAMED OR REMOVED GROUPS???: > news.software.anu-news VMS B-news software from Australian > National Univ. > news.software.b Discussion about B-news-compatible software. > news.software.nntp The Network News Transfer Protocol. > news.software.notes Notesfile software from the Univ. of Illinois. > There doesn't seem to be a sufficient number of existing subcategories to make this worthwhile (i.e. fears of proliferation do not seem to be based in fact). The ability to subscribe to a newgroup dedicated to one's reader is more desireable than not, in my opinion. It is also analogous to the already existing situation whereby specific UNIX command-shells have their own dedicated newgroups. ----- Steve Emmerson steve@unidata.ucar.edu
sullivan@aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) (11/28/89)
I, for one, like this idea. Just the other day I had a question about vn. Since it doesn't have its own software group I didn't know where to post the question do. In fact, I can't remember where I posted it to. Must be around here someplace... -- Michael Sullivan uunet!jarthur.uucp!aqdata!sullivan aQdata, Inc. aqdata!sullivan@jarthur.claremont.edu San Dimas, CA
sloane@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (11/28/89)
In article <68@van-bc.UUCP>, jtc@wimsey.bc.ca writes: > PROPOSAL: > Merge current news.software.* groups into the two new > groups: news.software.transports and news.software.readers. >... > > RENAMED OR REMOVED GROUPS???: > news.software.anu-news VMS B-news software from Australian > National Univ. >... > > COMMENTS: > This is my attempt at rationalizing the news.software.all hierarchy. > Constructive criticisim is welcome, flames are not. > > I can see the need for groups describing a particular implementation > due to limited interest, high volume, or a mailing list gateway. Well, news.software.anu-news is a limited interest group, in that it only runs on VAX/VMS machines. I think there are about 200-300 sites world wide using this package. Leaving it in its own newsgroup lets sites that aren't interested avoid the traffic. It currently has about 20-25 messages per week. It is also gatewayed to the ANU-NEWS@VM1.NODAK.EDU mailing list. I would rather not have to read all the news.software.b postings to see the anu stuff. I suspect that the unix people would rather not hear about the anu problems. Just out of curiosity, why do you think your scheme is better than the current one? It seems perfectly rational to me to have one group per package, so people can find articles of interest easily. -- USmail: Bob Sloane, University of Kansas Computer Center, Lawrence, KS, 66045 E-mail: sloane@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu, sloane@ukanvax.bitnet, AT&T: (913)864-0444
jtc@van-bc.UUCP (J.T. Conklin) (11/29/89)
In article <18904.25725545@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> sloane@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes: >Well, news.software.anu-news is a limited interest group, in that it only runs >on VAX/VMS machines. I think there are about 200-300 sites world wide using >this package. Leaving it in its own newsgroup lets sites that aren't >interested avoid the traffic. It currently has about 20-25 messages per week. >It is also gatewayed to the ANU-NEWS@VM1.NODAK.EDU mailing list. I would >rather not have to read all the news.software.b postings to see the anu stuff. >I suspect that the unix people would rather not hear about the anu problems. Actually, the anu and nntp groups are what I was refering to in my proposal (I didn't word it very well). They certainly deserve their own groups. I was questioning whether or not they should be left alone or moved under the proposed "news.software.transports.*" hierarchy. Nntp would fit nicely here, anu less so. >Just out of curiosity, why do you think your scheme is better than the current >one? It seems perfectly rational to me to have one group per package, so >people can find articles of interest easily. In general, discussions about the news software can be divided between readers and transports. If traffic warrents a separate group for a particular software package, I would rather it be organized in the appropriate sub-hierarchy. Something like this: news.software.readers.nn news.software.readers.rn news.software.readers.misc news.software.transports news.software.transports.nntp Rather than: news.software.b news.software.c news.software.gnews news.software.gnus news.software.nn news.software.nntp . . . --jtc -- J.T. Conklin ...!{uunet,ubc-cs}!van-bc!jtc, jtc@wimsey.bc.ca
jeh@simpact.com (11/29/89)
In article <68@van-bc.UUCP>, jtc@wimsey.bc.ca writes: > PROPOSAL: > Merge current news.software.* groups into the two new > groups: news.software.transports and news.software.readers. > ... I strongly disagree. I see nothing wrong with multiple newsgroups. There are good reasons, for example, for VMS users to subscribe to news.software.anu-news (which we're running, and which, btw, has utterly nothing to do with B-news other than message header formats) and not news.software.b -- who cares about bug reports and patches in software you're not running? (Personally, I do subscribe to news.software.b, because I'm semi-involved in testing new releases of anu news, occasionally finding bugs, suggesting enhancements, etc., and looking over the b-news folks' shoulders is beneficial.) --- Jamie Hanrahan, Simpact Associates, San Diego CA Chair, VMSnet [DECUS uucp] and Internals Working Groups, DECUS VAX Systems SIG Internet: jeh@simpact.com, or if that fails, jeh@crash.cts.com Uucp: ...{crash,scubed,decwrl}!simpact!jeh
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (11/30/89)
In article <73@van-bc.UUCP> jtc@van-bc.UUCP (J.T. Conklin) writes: >In general, discussions about the news software can be divided between >readers and transports. The question is, does this justify separating the two in the news hierarchy? Why? >Something like this: >news.software.readers.nn >news.software.readers.rn >news.software.readers.misc >news.software.transports >news.software.transports.nntp > >Rather than: >news.software.b >news.software.c >news.software.gnews >news.software.gnus >news.software.nn >news.software.nntp Can you explain what adding another level does for us? Apart from satisfying frustrated would-be librarians suffering from Dewey Decimal Syndrome, I mean. Is anyone really likely to confuse, say, news.software.nn with news.software.nntp? Is any site likely to want to get the transport groups and not the reader groups? What does the split buy us? -- That's not a joke, that's | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology NASA. -Nick Szabo | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
dan@ccnysci.UUCP (Dan Schlitt) (11/30/89)
In article <1989Nov27.232451.12345@aqdata.uucp> sullivan@aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) writes:
:I, for one, like this idea. Just the other day I had a question about
:vn. Since it doesn't have its own software group I didn't know where
:to post the question do. In fact, I can't remember where I posted it
:to. Must be around here someplace...
:--
:Michael Sullivan uunet!jarthur.uucp!aqdata!sullivan
:aQdata, Inc. aqdata!sullivan@jarthur.claremont.edu
:San Dimas, CA
I, too, support this idea. If there are separate groups I will read
only the groups that relate to the transport/reader that I have here.
If all the discussion is in a single group then I am much more likely
to find out about transports/readers that are improvements over the
ones I am using.
--
Dan Schlitt Manager, Science Division Computer Facility
dan@sci.ccny.cuny.edu City College of New York
dan@ccnysci.uucp New York, NY 10031
dan@ccnysci.bitnet (212)690-6868tale@cs.rpi.edu (Dave Lawrence) (12/01/89)
I've withdrawn my previous support for this proposal. It seems I was
getting a tad misled by what I like and what I think is right for me
and confusing it with what is really best for everyone else. What's
best for me? I'd probably do quite well with just one news.software
group for all of the traffic regarding readers and transport
mechanisms. I want to understand them all, at least on an elementary
level, because I think it makes me a better news admin. Most people
don't really care about the interoperability of it all -- quite
rightly so, too; it is fine for them to be interested in just what
they are running. news.software.{b,nntp,nn,&c} is okay as is without
interjecting "transports" and "readers" hierarchies into them.
It seems that for my personal newsreading desires it would be handy to
have a reader which allowed me to file things where I wanted to see
them -- ie, lump all of the news.software.* groups I read into one,
just for reading. Or throw the alt.sources and the comp.sources.*
groups which interest me into another pseudo-group of my reader.
In article <5458@ncar.ucar.edu> steve@groucho.ucar.edu (Steve Emmerson) writes:
The ability to subscribe to a newgroup dedicated to one's reader is
more desireable than not, in my opinion. It is also analogous to the
already existing situation whereby specific UNIX command-shells have
their own dedicated newgroups.
And which groups in The Big Seven are these?
Dave
--
(setq mail '("tale@cs.rpi.edu" "tale@ai.mit.edu" "tale@rpitsmts.bitnet"))
"... the broader subject of usenet customs and other bizarre social phenomena."
-- Phil Agre <agre@gargoyle.uchicago.edu>dww@stl.stc.co.uk (David Wright) (12/03/89)
In article <68@van-bc.UUCP> jtc@wimsey.bc.ca writes:
# Merge current news.software.* groups into the two new
# groups: news.software.transports and news.software.readers.
and goes on to list the groups that would be combined.
Bad idea.
I take the point someone made that news admins should know about all the
news software in use on the net. but most of us have limited time, and have
to prioritise. What I'd like to see is MORE news.software groups, in
particular news.software.c, news.software.nn (as is already being
discussed), news.software.rn, and also news.software.misc for anything that
does not fit into n.s.b, .c, .nn, .nntp, .anu-news, .notes etc.
Locally we use B news and rn. In future I expect we'll use C news and xrn.
We may use nn (if someone here wants it enough to install it), but will
never use notes and anu-news (we did try the last for a while). As the
news admin here, I ought ideally to know about all of these, but in practice
I want to know about problems/enhancements with B news and rn straight away,
C news etc. for future reference, and notes etc only if I have spare time.
With a set of news groups I can set my .newsrc in the above priority order,
and keep very up to date on the software we use here, while checking up on
the rest when I have time, so I know about what's being used elsewhere.
Regards, David Wright STL, London Road, Harlow, Essex CM17 9NA, UK
dww@stl.stc.co.uk <or> ...uunet!mcvax!ukc!stl!dww <or> PSI%234237100122::DWW
Living in a country without a written constitution means having to trust in
the Good Will of the Government and the Generosity of Civil Servants.sullivan@aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) (12/04/89)
How about news.software.misc? -- Michael Sullivan uunet!jarthur.uucp!aqdata!sullivan aQdata, Inc. San Dimas, CA