jbuck@epimass.EPI.COM (Joe Buck) (12/21/87)
I propose the creation of the group comp.sources.games.bugs.
The newsgroups list would be modified to include the line
comp.sources.games.bugs Bug reports, fixes for postings in comp.sources.games
Bugs in posted games would no longer be discussed in comp.bugs.misc
(where they never should have been) or in comp.sources.bugs (the
current "appropriate place").
Creation of this group will have several benefits:
1) People uninterested in games that want to get bug reports for
important public-domain programs we all rely on like "patch" and
"compress" won't have to wade through dozens of complaints about
the latest version of conquest or nethack.
2) Sites uninterested in paying for transmitting game sources (you
guys are no fun, but I understand your reasoning) won't transmit
the game bug discussion either (that's why I chose the name
comp.sources.games.bugs -- putting !comp.sources.games in the
sys line stops them both)
3) People who ARE interested in getting games to work have a dedicated
place to go.
There is clearly traffic volume to warrant the group creation, and
I've seen lots of complaints from comp.sources.bugs readers that
don't want to hear about the games.
So let's vote! According to the rules, posted votes don't count,
so MAIL your votes to me, jbuck@epimass.epi.com. If your mailer
doesn't grok domains, send to ...!smartsite!epimass.epi.com!jbuck
where smartsite is one of uunet, harvard, rutgers, sun, ucbvax,
talcott, or somebody else who runs a routing mailer. Voting will
close on Jan. 20 or when I have 100 more yes votes than no votes.
Followups to this article are directed to news.groups. Don't follow
up just to vote yes or no. Do follow up for discussion, questions,
flames, etc.
--
- Joe Buck {uunet,ucbvax,sun,decwrl,<smart-site>}!epimass.epi.com!jbuck
Old internet mailers: jbuck%epimass.epi.com@uunet.uu.netcosell@WILMA.BBN.COM (Bernie Cosell) (12/22/87)
I'm registering my vote properly, but I wanted to make a public comment: I don't like think suggestion. There are a BUNCH of "sources" groups (comp.sources, comp.sources.misc, comp.sources.amiga, etc). I was under the impression that comp.sources.bugs was the common bug channel for them ALL. While I understand that "games" are a sensitive matter at some sites, I am unpersuaded by Joe's arguments that that ONEs bugs feed should be separated from all of the others. I think that either we should move to have EVERY sources group have its own .bugs and .d feeds (which I think would be just fine), or we should leave things as they are. __ / ) Bernie Cosell /--< _ __ __ o _ BBN Labs, Cambridge, MA 02238 /___/_(<_/ (_/) )_(_(<_ cosell@bbn.com
khearn@polyslo.UUCP (keith hearn) (01/04/88)
In article <10933@brl-adm.ARPA> cosell@WILMA.BBN.COM (Bernie Cosell) writes: >I'm registering my vote properly, but I wanted to make a public comment: > >I don't like think suggestion. There are a BUNCH of "sources" >groups (comp.sources, comp.sources.misc, comp.sources.amiga, etc). I was >under the impression that comp.sources.bugs was the common bug channel >for them ALL. While I understand that "games" are a sensitive matter >at some sites, I am unpersuaded by Joe's arguments that that ONEs bugs >feed should be separated from all of the others. I think that either >we should move to have EVERY sources group have its own .bugs and .d >feeds (which I think would be just fine), or we should leave things as >they are. > __ > / ) Bernie Cosell > /--< _ __ __ o _ BBN Labs, Cambridge, MA 02238 >/___/_(<_/ (_/) )_(_(<_ cosell@bbn.com Bernie, The reason for a separate newsgroup for games bugs is simply volume. Lately, there has been almost as many articles on bugs in games (one or two in particular) posted as there have been articles for everything else combined! people who aren't interested in games have to wade through the game bugs, and those of us who are interested in games have to wade through the non-game bugs. I am responsible for most of the game maintanence at this site, and it would make my job much easier if the game bugs were in their own group. If other special intrest source groups start creating the volume of bug reports/fixes that games do, then i would support separate groups for their bugs. As for why each source group can't have it's own .bug and .d group, i don't know exactly why, but the net.gods prefer to keep the number of group down as much as possible (It's a good reason, i just can't recall it right now). Keith Hearn "games" polyslo Dislcaimer: The opinions atated above are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Cal Poly, its Computer Science Department, or its faculty or staff. -- ihnp4!psivax!csun!\ | Bug Hunter: Now hunting and killing >polyslo!khearn| dirty slimy slugs too! ucbvax!sdcsvax!sdsu!/ |
webber@brandx.rutgers.edu (Webber) (01/04/88)
In article <919@polyslo.UUCP>, khearn@polyslo.UUCP (keith hearn) writes: > The reason for a separate newsgroup for games bugs is simply volume. Lately, > there has been almost as many articles on bugs in games (one or two in > particular) posted as there have been articles for everything else combined! > people who aren't interested in games have to wade through the game bugs, and > those of us who are interested in games have to wade through the non-game bugs. Last month there was less than 4 articles a day (118 for the month -- see Arbitron stats) . You can't even get your toes wet wading in that! There is no volume problem here. There are groups that processed over a thousand messages this past month. > ... > each source group can't have it's own .bug and .d group, i don't know exactly > why, but the net.gods prefer to keep the number of group down as much as > possible (It's a good reason, i just can't recall it right now). The reason is because of a bug in the news software which makes it difficult to support a very large name set (someone using arrays when they shouldn't have -- sigh). Any way, 20 groups more or less isn't going to break anyone, there is just the general notion that if we aren't careful, someday someone is going to have to patch their software. ----- BOB (webber@athos.rutgers.edu ; rutgers!athos.rutgers.edu!webber)