david@ukma.UUCP (David Herron, NPR Lover) (07/11/85)
In article <3203@cca.UUCP> norcott@cca.UUCP (Bill Norcott) writes: > > Let's start a new newsgroup called NET.SOURCES.PC. Quite a few of >the non-VAX sources submitted are for the IBM PC anyway, so why not make it >official? My trigger finger is getting tired from hitting "n" all the time. > First, note that this was posted to innappropriate groups, I've taken the liberty of setting a Followup-To: net.news.group. This had been discussed some months ago (about the time that net.sources.games appeared). The consensus then was that a group specific to a particular hardware wasn't appropriate. But that a net.sources.micro might be more appropriate. How do people feel now? -- --- David Herron --- ARPA-> ukma!david@ANL-MCS.ARPA or ukma!david<@ANL-MCS> --- or david%ukma.uucp@anl-mcs.arpa --- Or even anlams!ukma!david@ucbvax.arpa --- UUCP-> {ucbvax,unmvax,boulder,oddjob}!anlams!ukma!david --- {ihnp4,decvax,ucbvax}!cbosgd!ukma!david "It's *Super*User* to the rescue!"
greenber@timeinc.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) (07/12/85)
Er.......did anyone ever notice that there is a group called net.sources.mac?
Now either this is a machine group, or it discusses the genealogy of
special hamburgers....
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ross M. Greenberg @ Time Inc, New York
--------->{ihnp4 | vax135}!timeinc!greenber<---------
I highly doubt that Time Inc. they would make me their spokesperson.john@moncol.UUCP (John Ruschmeyer) (07/13/85)
]From: david@ukma.UUCP (David Herron, NPR Lover)
]Message-ID: <1955@ukma.UUCP>
]Organization: Univ. of KY Mathematical Sciences
]
]In article <3203@cca.UUCP> norcott@cca.UUCP (Bill Norcott) writes:
]>
]> Let's start a new newsgroup called NET.SOURCES.PC. Quite a few of
]>the non-VAX sources submitted are for the IBM PC anyway, so why not make it
]>official? My trigger finger is getting tired from hitting "n" all the time.
]
]This had been discussed some months ago (about the time that
]net.sources.games appeared). The consensus then was that a
]group specific to a particular hardware wasn't appropriate. But
]that a net.sources.micro might be more appropriate.
]
]How do people feel now?
One of the problems with the current breakdown of net.sources is that it is
*VERY* inconsistent. As it stands, we have one big group for the posting of
most sources (net.sources), one for posting of sources of a particular type
(net.sources.games), and one for posting of sources for a particular
machine (net.sources.mac).
Personally, I find the creation of a group called net.sources.micro to
be very disturbing. Creating it would leave us all with another catch-all
group like net.sources . I own an IBM compatable, but would not want to
have to wade through posting after posting of CP/M or Apple ][ programs.
(It is already bad enough that I have to wade through 4.2 and Sys
V-specific sources to find something that will run on our v7 system!)
The only logical breakdown of net.sources is along the lines of
operating system. Ideally, the structure should look something like this:
net.sources (posting of generic UNIX sources)
net.sources.bsd (4.1, 4.2, 4.3 specific sources- non portable)
net.sources.usg (Sys III, Sys V specific- non portable)
net.sources.vms (Vax VMS specific)
net.sources.mac (Macintosh)
net.sources.cpm (CP/M software)
net.sources.msdos (IBM-PC and MS-DOS software)
. .
. .
. .
net.sources.bugs (bug reports)
Ideally, net.sources.games should be eliminated under this structure.
Instead, game sources would be posted to the appropriate OS group.
This structure would allow the posting of software for machines such
as the IBM-PC with a minimum of bother to sites which don't own such a
machine. It would allow a site to tailor its receipt of net.sources to only
those groups for which it owns an appropriate machine.
There is and will continue to be an incredible growth in the number of
UNIX-based machines and the number of machines on USENET. As it currently
stands, net.sources is becoming woefully inadequate for handling all that
it must. As it presently stands, net.sources best benefits sites who own Vaxen
running 4.2 or Sys V. With a little reorganizing, net.sources could best
benefit *all* sites, no matter what system they run, UNIX or otherwise.
Subgroups will be needed, but let them be created with some thought to the
future and how to best benefit all the sites on the net.
--
Name: John Ruschmeyer
US Mail: Monmouth College, W. Long Branch, NJ 07764
Phone: (201) 222-6600 x366
UUCP: ...!vax135!petsd!moncol!john ...!princeton!moncol!john
...!pesnta!moncol!john
Ingredients:
Carbonated water, sugar, caramel color, phosphoric acid,
natural flavorings, caffeinecampbell@maynard.UUCP (Larry Campbell) (07/15/85)
> The only logical breakdown of net.sources is along the lines of > operating system. Ideally, the structure should look something like this: > > net.sources (posting of generic UNIX sources) > net.sources.bsd (4.1, 4.2, 4.3 specific sources- non portable) > net.sources.usg (Sys III, Sys V specific- non portable) > net.sources.vms (Vax VMS specific) > net.sources.mac (Macintosh) > net.sources.cpm (CP/M software) > net.sources.msdos (IBM-PC and MS-DOS software) > . . > . . > . . > net.sources.bugs (bug reports) > > Ideally, net.sources.games should be eliminated under this structure. > Instead, game sources would be posted to the appropriate OS group. > ... > -- > Name: John Ruschmeyer > US Mail: Monmouth College, W. Long Branch, NJ 07764 > Phone: (201) 222-6600 x366 > UUCP: ...!vax135!petsd!moncol!john ...!princeton!moncol!john > ...!pesnta!moncol!john I agree with this suggestion, except for the elimination of net.sources.games. Having games in a separate newsgroup makes it easy to flush them from your system and not to forward them. This is particularly useful since this newsgroup sometimes has a lot of volume, and there are those who have no interest in it. My modification to the original suggestion would be to either keep net.sources.games, or to add net.sources.<os>.games, so I can continue to receive all sources EXCEPT games sources. (P.S. - I'm not a heartless fascist system admin; my system is my own personal (literally) computer (DEC Rainbow) and I haven't the disk space for games.) - Larry Campbell The Boston Software Works, Inc., 120 Fulton St., Boston MA 02109 UUCP: {decvax, security, linus, mit-eddie}!genrad!enmasse!maynard!campbell ARPA: decvax!genrad!enmasse!maynard!campbell@DECWRL.ARPA
stv@qantel.UUCP (Steve Vance@ex2499) (07/16/85)
In article <423@moncol.UUCP> john@moncol.UUCP (John Ruschmeyer) writes: > net.sources (posting of generic UNIX sources) > net.sources.bsd (4.1, 4.2, 4.3 specific sources- non portable) > net.sources.usg (Sys III, Sys V specific- non portable) > net.sources.vms (Vax VMS specific) > net.sources.mac (Macintosh) > net.sources.cpm (CP/M software) > net.sources.msdos (IBM-PC and MS-DOS software) > . . > . . > . . > net.sources.bugs (bug reports) WOW! I nominate this article for "Well Thought Out Article" of the month! -- Steve Vance {dual,hplabs,intelca,nsc,proper}!qantel!stv dual!qantel!stv@berkeley Qantel Corporation, Hayward, CA
itkin@luke.UUCP (Steven List) (07/16/85)
In article <423@moncol.UUCP> john@moncol.UUCP (John Ruschmeyer) writes: >]> Let's start a new newsgroup called NET.SOURCES.PC. Quite a few of >]>the non-VAX sources submitted are for the IBM PC anyway, so why not make it >]>official? >] >]How do people feel now? > > Personally, I find the creation of a group called net.sources.micro to >be very disturbing... > The only logical breakdown of net.sources is along the lines of >operating system. Ideally, the structure should look something like this: > > net.sources (posting of generic UNIX sources) > . > . > . > net.sources.bugs (bug reports) I think John has the right GENERAL idea, but disagree on the specifics. Instead of proliferating new newsgroups, why not eliminate net.sources, net.sources.games and take advantage of mod.sources? Then the moderator could identify the category (if possible) and compatibility (also if possible) and everyone could determine if they were interested from the Keywords: message. The above assumes, of course, that john@genrad is willing. If not, there seems to be enough interest (and enough interested parties) that someone else could help out. It seems the direction should be away from the generally accessible newsgroups and toward the moderated. -- *** * Steven List @ Benetics Corporation, Mt. View, CA * Just part of the stock at "Uncle Bene's Farm" * {cdp,greipa,idi,oliveb,sun,tolerant}!bene!luke!itkin ***