alb@alice.UUCP (Adam L. Buchsbaum) (04/09/84)
You miss the point of the two groups. They are not for different aspects of UNIX. They are for different levels of UNIX users/programmers.
jsq@ut-sally.UUCP (John Quarterman) (04/10/84)
If it ain't broken, don't fix it.
--
John Quarterman, CS Dept., University of Texas, Austin, Texas
jsq@ut-sally.ARPA, jsq@ut-sally.UUCP, {ihnp4,seismo,ctvax}!ut-sally!jsqber@gummo.UUCP (04/12/84)
#R:proper:-111700:gummo:38000003:000:44 gummo!ber Apr 11 18:53:00 1984 If it ain't broken, break it! Then fix it.
gam@proper.UUCP (Gordon Moffett) (04/14/84)
# The volume of net.unix and net.unix-wizards is humungous (large) as it is. I fear the proposal to combine them would make net.unix a dreadful newsgroup to scan for particular issues. To help break up this volume in an orderly way, and to remove the vaguely titled ``net.unix-wizards'', I propose replacing net.unix-wizards with net.unix.kernel (including device drivers, system calls, i/o system and file system esoterica), and leave net.unix for questions on the ``applications'' (programs) part of Unix. Comments? Criticisms? What other ways can we break-up the net.unix / net.unix-wizards mass into meaningfully titled newsgroups?
pedz@smu.UUCP (05/03/84)
#R:proper:-111700:smu:15700001:000:582 smu!pedz Apr 19 23:10:00 1984 I think it is a good idea. Response #1 about the different levels is a bit amuzing. What levels? Looking for a termcap is high level? I think by subject is much more appropiate. Everyone thinks that his question/statments are high level. How about a set of groups like the micro. There could be unix.wanted, unix.kernel, unix.applications, unix.other. Also, stricter enforcement of the use of the bug files should be made such that bugs are reported in the appropiate bug file instead of a unix file. Perry convex!smu!pedz (In my opinion it is broke, PLEASE someone fix it)