mboen@nixpbe.UUCP (Martin Boening) (02/01/90)
>comp.sources.minix.ibm >comp.sources.minix.st >comp.sources.minix.amiga >comp.sources.minix.mac (when it comes...) >comp.os.minix (of course this already exists.) This is NOT a good idea. We shouldn't split this group into system dependent groups. As everybody who's been following this group the last couple of weeks should know by now it is important to keep an eye on all systems. Just look at the update for Minix ST to 1.5.0 - without the stuff from the PC update it's impossible to do it because you need the sources and diffs. And if there are groups like ....minix.pc, ...minix.st and so on, I don't believe the stuff which is relevant to the PC would make it into the other groups. Therefore, to keep track of everything, you'd have to read all groups anyway. Result: - pollution of namespace without saving anything to the reader. However, maybe the group should be split into, say, comp.os.minix.d and comp.os.minix.sources. Then anybody not caring for the discussions could stop reading comp.os.minix.d Over and out :-) M. Boening -- Email: in the USA -> ...!uunet!philabs!linus!nixbur!mboening.pad outside USA -> {...!mcvax}!unido!nixpbe!mboening.pad Paper Mail: Martin Boening, Nixdorf Computer AG, DS-CC22, Pontanusstr. 55, 4790 Paderborn, W.-Germany
ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) (02/03/90)
In article <773@nixpbe.UUCP> mboen@nixpbe.UUCP (Martin Boening) writes: >Then anybody not caring for the discussions could >stop reading comp.os.minix.d I think that would be unwise. You might miss comments like: DON"T RUN TEST20 ON YOUR HARD DISK. IT WILL WIPE IT OUT. The only sane thing to do is read the discussion too, in which case splitting it wins little. The only thing it might do is make it easier to find things. If the volume keeps increasing, at some point we might have to consider something. Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl)