haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) (08/19/88)
In article <478@c10sd1.StPaul.NCR.COM> johnson@c10sd1.StPaul.NCR.COM (Wayne D. T. Johnson) writes: >OK, how about forming a list of these systems and all the information on >how to access them via UUCP. ... >If there is no list, I would ask anyone who has a working connection to >one of these, (please, no rumors about someone who knows someone, who knows...) >please EMAIL the pertinate info and I will compile and post these. some months ago bill wisner tried to create a newsgroup for the posting of archive site information. the vote failed miserably due to lack of interest. at the suggestion of certain backbone members, i have been posting my site's information on a regular basis. however, few other sites have followed suit and as a result there is still no easy way to locate a sources archive. how about creating a newsgroup for the sole purpose of posting archive information to? i am suggesting we create a new group, comp.sources.archives for the posting of archive site information. it can be an unmoderated group to make it easier for people to update their sites information, and discuss problems with using various archive sites. lets have two weeks discussion, which will hopefully be followed by a vote. i'll collect the votes if it ever gets to that point. -- jfh@rpp386.uucp (The Beach Bum at The Big "D" Home for Wayward Hackers) "Never attribute to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity" -- Hanlon's Razor
wilkes@mips.COM (John Wilkes) (08/20/88)
I like the idea. How about local groups? (e.g., ba.sources.archives for the SF Bay area.) -wilkes -- -- work: {decwrl ames pyramid prls}!mips!wilkes -OR- wilkes@mips.com
woods@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu (Greg Woods) (08/20/88)
In article <362@pigs.UUCP> haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) writes: >[.... etc. ...] >how about creating a newsgroup for the sole purpose of posting archive >information to? i am suggesting we create a new group, comp.sources.archives >for the posting of archive site information. it can be an unmoderated >group to make it easier for people to update their sites information, >and discuss problems with using various archive sites. I like the un-moderated bit. Then I can post periodic listings from /usr/local/src, cause even though I don't actally "archive" the groups as such, I do collect fairly massive amounts of source (15 Mb online, currently). I wouldn't mind opening up my site for local distribution. I also provide an added benefit: Most of the stuff I have is in working condition. (Torontonians, take note.) I've always wanted to be able to get stuff from the archives, but I don't like paying long-distace phone bills, and the local site's around here either don't keep their working stuff up to date, or, they don't care to open up for distribution. -- Greg Woods. UUCP: utgpu!woods, utgpu!{ontmoh, ontmoh!ixpierre}!woods VOICE: (416) 242-7572 [h] LOCATION: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) (08/20/88)
In article <2852@electron.mips.COM> wilkes@electron.UUCP (John Wilkes) writes: > >I like the idea. How about local groups? (e.g., ba.sources.archives for the >SF Bay area.) No -- lets make this netwide. Nothing against local groups, but this would leave those in a lurch who have no archive site in their immediate neighborhood, or require wider distribution of local groups which tends to just add to the general confusion on the net. By having a netwide group, archive site admins would also have all the info in one place in case their site missed a specific item and needs to get it from one of the other archives. Wolf -- Wolf N. Paul * 3387 Sam Rayburn Run * Carrollton TX 75007 * (214) 306-9101 UUCP: killer!dcs!wnp ESL: 62832882 DOMAIN: wnp%dcs@killer.dallas.tx.us TLX: 910-380-0585 EES PLANO UD
bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells) (08/26/88)
In article <362@pigs.UUCP> haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) writes:
: lets have two weeks discussion, which will hopefully be followed by a
: vote. i'll collect the votes if it ever gets to that point.
You'll get my "yes" if it ever gets that far. It is very tedious
collecting the archive information from the various newsgroups
where it gets posted. But thanks anyway guys, its better than
nothing!
I'd suggest two groups: comp.sources.archives and
comp.sources.archives.d, the first for posting information on how
to access various archives, the second for discussion of problems
accessing archives (path xyzzy!abcd!foobar didn't work! Help!),
problems with archiving sites (I got bletch.Z from site glorch
and it wouldn't decompress!), archiving systems themselves (try
Bugaboo SW's archive server, wow!), and of anything else relating
to archives and archiving.
Alternatively, I'd suggest that there be an established way of
identifying which postings contained archive information (like a
specially formatted subject line) so that we can find the
information we want easily.
---
Bill
novavax!proxftl!bill
clarke@acheron.UUCP (Ed Clarke) (08/27/88)
From article <621@proxftl.UUCP>, by bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells): > In article <362@pigs.UUCP> haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) writes: > : lets have two weeks discussion, which will hopefully be followed by a > : vote. i'll collect the votes if it ever gets to that point. > You'll get my "yes" if it ever gets that far. It is very tedious > collecting the archive information from the various newsgroups Why don't you put archive information in the 'misc' section of your uucp map entry? If you use the keyword ARCHIVE, it can be searched with a perl script or even just grep. No moderator required and also no new newsgroup. Ed Clarke uunet!bywater!acheron!clarke
haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) (08/28/88)
[ i am going to start moving all of my followups and articles to news.groups for the time when this actually comes to a vote. the suggestion by t. w. wells is a very good one. we might just have something here ... ] In article <621@proxftl.UUCP> bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells) writes: >I'd suggest two groups: comp.sources.archives and >comp.sources.archives.d, the first for posting information on how >to access various archives, the second for discussion of problems >accessing archives (path xyzzy!abcd!foobar didn't work! Help!), >problems with archiving sites (I got bletch.Z from site glorch >and it wouldn't decompress!), archiving systems themselves (try >Bugaboo SW's archive server, wow!), and of anything else relating >to archives and archiving. i hadn't considered this approach. the original suggestion was for an unmoderated newgroup, but with this two group attack it would be worthwhile to have the first group moderated. i'm not sure how good an idea having discussion regarding archive software itself since any such code would be o/s or machine dependent. how many people are running TOPS-20 on a DECSystem-20 this week? the only difficulty i see with this is getting two groups created at once. if anyone in the backbone cabal would like to comment on making two new groups at the same time i would be more than willing to listen. >Alternatively, I'd suggest that there be an established way of >identifying which postings contained archive information (like a >specially formatted subject line) so that we can find the >information we want easily. definitely. if the first suggestion of yours doesn't fly then this would be the only surefire way to insure people can use the info present. - john. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-The Beach Bum at The Big "D" Home for Wayward Hackers-=-=-=-=-=-= Very Long Address: John.F.Haugh@rpp386.dallas.tx.us Very Short Address: jfh@rpp386 "ANSI C: Just say no" -- Me
karl@romeo.cs.duke.edu (Karl Ramm) (08/28/88)
In article <231@acheron.UUCP> clarke@acheron.UUCP (Ed Clarke) writes: >Why don't you put archive information in the 'misc' section of your >uucp map entry? If you use the keyword ARCHIVE, it can be searched >with a perl script or even just grep. No moderator required and also >no new newsgroup. Because the group in question would also maintain records of ARPAnet anonymous ftp archives... also, not everyone faithfully saves a copy of the UUCP maps... They just remember where their nearest smart host is. Even so, putting whether you are an archive site in your UUCP map entry IS a good idea.. but it doesn't eliminate the need for a newsgroup. /*----- Karl Ramm ------------------------------------------------------------*\ |* This space intentionally left blank. Internet: karl@cs.duke.edu *| \*-------------------------------------------------- USENET: mcnc!duke!karl --*/
how@milhow1.UUCP (Mike Howard) (08/29/88)
How about archiving the archive info someplace and periodically posting a listing of the archive info listings and how to get them. The general idea seems to be to collect _all_ archive access information in one `location'. It should be a little more efficient to collect the actual information at an archive site(s) and periodically post (every two weeks?) information on how to get the archive info lists and what lists (with revision dates) are available. Archive maintainers would then mail their archive info to the archive site(s) - which (should be able to) can automatically generate the summary list. Summary list(s) would probably have to be mailed to some central distribution for reposting. Anyway, this list should be a short concise index to archive info. BTW, I would like that quite a bit better than having the archive info which I don't care about cropping up in groups I am reading for `content'. Are a there any groups which currently exist which would be suitable for such a list - such as `comp.newuser'? -- Mike Howard uunet!milhow1!how
tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) (08/30/88)
One question about comp.sources.archives: would archive sites be tempted to post their entire file directory listings, with comments, to the group? Would it be too much to carry if they did? Should postings be limited to "I archive these newsgroups and RFCs"? Will users post numerous requests for specific files ("has anyone got this" etc)? Should the group be moderated for the foregoing reasons? Okay, FIVE questions. :-) -- Tom Neff UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff "None of your toys CIS: 76556,2536 MCI: TNEFF will function..." GEnie: TOMNEFF BIX: t.neff (no kidding)
bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells) (08/30/88)
In article <231@acheron.UUCP> clarke@acheron.UUCP (Ed Clarke) writes:
: Why don't you put archive information in the 'misc' section of your
: uucp map entry? If you use the keyword ARCHIVE, it can be searched
: with a perl script or even just grep. No moderator required and also
: no new newsgroup.
I have no real idea of what you are proposing. However, if you
are supposing that there is something that uucp sites could do to
collect this information easily, you may be right, but this is
irrelevant. Just what fraction of the sites on Usenet do you
think are uucp sites? Judging by the posting volume, that number
might be very small. And in any case, a piecemeal solution to
the problem of finding archives is not going to very
satisfactory. (OK, you uucp sites do A; you bitnet sites do B;
you arpa ...). Far better for there to be a newsgroup.
---
Bill
novavax!proxftl!bill
sewilco@datapg.MN.ORG (Scot E Wilcoxon) (08/31/88)
In article <6146@dasys1.UUCP> tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes: >Would archive sites be tempted to post their entire file directory listings, >with comments, to the group? Would it be too much to carry if they did? If the list is 62K (500 files), a full list is no problem. For a large archive site, the question is relevant to this discussion. The UUNET archive list is 225K (1100 files) with no comments, with comments it should be twice its present size (it presently is in `ls -l` format). >Should postings be limited >to "I archive these newsgroups and RFCs"? Specialties might be newsgroups, hardware or software types, or other concepts (graphics, text, linear programming, etc). This is a good idea, so one has an idea of which archive sites might have something. >Will users post numerous requests for specific files ("has anyone got this" etc)? They're already posting (see comp.sources.wanted). Instead of posting, most will find an archive site and inquire there. The "netlib" server has a "find" command which can be used to search for searching a directory for strings. The "decwrl" server does not have such a capability (yet). I don't know of any string searching in `ftp`... >Should the group be moderated for the foregoing reasons? Managers of archives should be aware enough of the nets to restrain themselves in direct proportion to the size of their archive or posting. If a standard format is adopted for indexes, I'd prefer no centralized handling. There will be some "wanted" postings, but in general they should be reduced netwide by the ability to find archive sites (maybe I'll start reading c.s.wanted again when the volume drops :-). -- Scot E. Wilcoxon sewilco@DataPg.MN.ORG {amdahl|hpda}!bungia!datapg!sewilco Data Progress UNIX masts & rigging +1 612-825-2607 uunet!datapg!sewilco
haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) (08/31/88)
[ this article is being sent to news.groups for further discussion. it is just about time to decide what the proposed newsgroup is going to smell like ... ] In article <219@milhow1.UUCP> how@.UUCP (Mike Howard) (...!uunet!milhow1!how) writes: >How about archiving the archive info someplace and periodically >posting a listing of the archive info listings and how to get them. the problem which is trying to be solved is that people don't know where the archives are because there is no clear newsgroup or area for archive site information to be posted. >BTW, I would like that quite a bit better than having the archive info >which I don't care about cropping up in groups I am reading for `content'. i recently stopped cross-posting to comp.unix.xenix for my xenix-ported stuff for exactly this reason. i noticed many of the sites calling in weren't xenix systems so it seemed very pointless to continue bothering those poor xenix folks ... >Are a there any groups which currently exist which would be suitable for >such a list - such as `comp.newuser'? there is a news.announce.newuser newsgroup. not that anyone pays any attention to what is posted there ... news.lists could be used but it is moderated. dealing with moderated groups is a hassle. first you need a moderator ... -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-The Beach Bum at The Big "D" Home for Wayward Hackers-=-=-=-=-=-= Very Long Address: John.F.Haugh@rpp386.dallas.tx.us Very Short Address: jfh@rpp386 "ANSI C: Just say no" -- Me
bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells) (08/31/88)
In article <6146@dasys1.UUCP> tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes:
: One question about comp.sources.archives: would archive sites be tempted
: to post their entire file directory listings, with comments, to the group?
I hope so! The whole idea is to get the information needed to
find the stuff you want, in one place. It does me little good
for someone to say "I have all of comp.sources.whatever except
volume 3." How the heck do I know what *was* in that newsgroup?
: Would it be too much to carry if they did? Should postings be limited
: to "I archive these newsgroups and RFCs"? Will users post numerous
: requests for specific files ("has anyone got this" etc)? Should the group
: be moderated for the foregoing reasons?
My current proposal is for two groups: comp.archives and
comp.archives.d; the first being moderated and for information
about what is available in various archives and how to get it;
the second for discussion related to archives. See my message
<621@proxftl.UUCP>. I have also suggested that we might want to
keep an archive of the archive information. As I said earlier, I
might be willing to do this, or to moderate the comp.archives
group.
---
Bill
novavax!proxftl!bill
haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) (09/01/88)
In article <8649@ihlpb.ATT.COM> nevin1@ihlpb.UUCP (55528-Liber,N.J.) writes: >Unfortunately, this approach doesn't usually work. i wouldn't leap to the conclusion that it doesn't usually work. my experience has been that it DOES usually work if the information is present. > I have tried >directly calling archive sites with a PC and a modem, and I have always >been timed out well before I get a shell prompt (let alone trying to >figure out how to actually do the download). i have seen much of what you describe, but the source of that problem is someones friend telling them a phone number and nothing more. if you aren't an experienced computer user [ which nevin would seem to be ] just a phone number is not enough information. another problem is that some sites give you 10 or 15 minutes and want you to enter your entire life history. on the other side of that coin are people who know enough to be dangerous and login to the archive guest password, not to access the archive, but to screw with the machine. i have this problem quite a bit and am considering removing the archive guest login on the system. > That is why many people >on the net ask for things to be emailed; they simple can't get anything >else to work! people on the net shouldn't have this problem. a quick look in the maps will reveal the site administrators name and email address. send the administrator a letter and have her explain how to use the archive to you. using email for sources is a waste of net resources. > I'm willing to pay my share of the bill; just tell me >how to get it to work! see the previous paragraph. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-The Beach Bum at The Big "D" Home for Wayward Hackers-=-=-=-=-=-= Very Long Address: John.F.Haugh@rpp386.dallas.tx.us Very Short Address: jfh@rpp386 "ANSI C: Just say no" -- Me
wcs@skep2.ATT.COM (Bill.Stewart.[ho95c]) (09/06/88)
In article <1635@datapg.MN.ORG> sewilco@datapg.MN.ORG (Scot E Wilcoxon) writes: :In article <6146@dasys1.UUCP> tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes: :>Would archive sites be tempted to post their entire file directory listings, :If the list is 62K (500 files), a full list is no problem. For a large :archive site, the question is relevant to this discussion. The UUNET archive :list is 225K (1100 files) with no comments, with comments it should be twice :its present size (it presently is in `ls -l` format). Why so large? Most of the archive postings I've seen from various places are about 80 char/file, and if uunet archives are like comp.sources postings, half the files only need an abbreviated listing (foo/part7 60000 char.) 1100 files ought to be about 50-60K. In any case, we certainly don't need *.archives and *.archives.d. -- #Bill Stewart, AT&T Bell Labs 2G218 Holmdel NJ 201-949-0705 ho95c.att.com!wcs # Now I don't mean to insult the intelligence of the younger people here, # but you really shouldn't try fire-eating on your own. You shouldn't # even be smoking cigarrettes like us ....... Unless you want to look cool.
haugj@pigs.UUCP (The Beach Bum) (09/06/88)
In article <233@skep2.ATT.COM> wcs@skep2.UUCP (46323-Bill.Stewart.[ho95c],2G218,x0705,) writes: >In any case, we certainly don't need *.archives and *.archives.d. the current reasoning is that comp.archives would be for moderated postings of archive information regarding actual archive sites and their contents and comp.archives.d would be for unmoderated postings. someone has offered to moderate the group and i have yet to receive a response to a letter which was writtem him. if another moderator would like to offer their services, we could get on with the vote. otherwise, i will formally suggest a vote be taken on comp.archives starting the end of this week. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-The Beach Bum at The Big "D" Home for Wayward Hackers-=-=-=-=-=-= Very Long Address: John.F.Haugh@rpp386.dallas.tx.us Very Short Address: jfh@rpp386 "ANSI C: Just say no" -- Me