tale@pawl.rpi.edu (David C Lawrence) (06/08/89)
I don't really know what to name it, but can we get a non-tech group
into the gnu hierarchy which would be suitable for general discussion
about the FSF and the GNU Project? I am afraid we might soon be
scaring away people from gnu.gcc who would otherwise participate in a
technical discussion. The issues being discussed certainly are
important and should be discussed, but it really isn't appropriate in
gnu.gcc. Looking at it from the mailing-list side, a bi-directional
gateway with gnu-politics@ai.mit.edu would include non-Usenet
participants (like RMS).
Is anyone else in favour of this, whatever the name might be?
Dave
--
(setq mail '("tale@pawl.rpi.edu" "tale@itsgw.rpi.edu" "tale@rpitsmts.bitnet"))
"I realize the Internet isn't the whole world, but it is the center of it."
-- Greg Woodstower@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Leonard H. Tower Jr.) (06/08/89)
In article <TALE.89Jun7154857@imagine.pawl.rpi.edu> tale@pawl.rpi.edu writes: |I don't really know what to name it, but can we get a non-tech group |into the gnu hierarchy which would be suitable for general discussion |about the FSF and the GNU Project? This is being discussed already and is likely to happen. The actual creation may wait until after Baltimore USENIX. If you have thoughts about any of the following, please send me mail (posting here is just a waste of bandwidth). Prefer tower@wheaties.ai.mit.edu but tower@bu-it.bu.edu or bu-cs!tower will do. * What should the name be? We have a half dozen candidates already, but as I don't wish to stifle creativity, I won't list them. Ideally a name won't carry bad manners with it from the larger USENET. gnu.flame, gnu.talk, gnu.politics, and gnu.philosophy all fail this test. * Should the group be in the alt heirarchy? Why? Why not? * A volunteer is needed to run the mailing list. An NSF/DoD Internet site not on the MILNET is preferred. A volunteer who already runs a large mailing list is preferred (most of the addresses will be off the Internet and knowledge of the gateways and remoter parts of the Matrix will be essential). thanx -len a.k.a. tower@wheaties.ai.mit.edu
krk@cs.purdue.EDU (Kevin Kuehl) (06/08/89)
> I don't really know what to name it, but can we get a non-tech group > into the gnu hierarchy which would be suitable for general discussion > about the FSF and the GNU Project? > Is anyone else in favour of this, whatever the name might be? Yes, I think it is a very good idea. That way we can also keep the technical stuff out of the arguments. :-) Kevin
spa@unl.fctunl.rccn.pt (Salvador Pinto Abreu) (06/09/89)
on 7 Jun 89 22:54:45 GMT, krk@cs.purdue.EDU (Kevin Kuehl) said: >> I don't really know what to name it, but can we get a non-tech group >> into the gnu hierarchy which would be suitable for general discussion >> about the FSF and the GNU Project? >> Is anyone else in favour of this, whatever the name might be? > Yes, I think it is a very good idea. That way we can also keep the > technical stuff out of the arguments. :-) I also agree. how about calling it gnu.d? -- --- Salvador Pinto Abreu BITNET/Internet: spa@fctunl.rccn.pt +---------------------------------+ UUCP: spa@unl.uucp | Departamento de Informatica +----------------------------------+ | Universidade Nova de Lisboa 2825 Monte Caparica, PORTUGAL | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
shadow@pawl.rpi.edu (Deven T. Corzine) (06/09/89)
In article <TALE.89Jun7154857@imagine.pawl.rpi.edu> tale@pawl.rpi.edu (David C Lawrence) writes:
Is anyone else in favour of this, whatever the name might be?
Absolutely. The sheer volume in gnu.gcc seems an effective
justification, ne?
Deven
--
shadow@[128.113.10.2] <shadow@pawl.rpi.edu> Deven T. Corzine (518) 272-5847
shadow@[128.113.10.201] <shadow@acm.rpi.edu> 2346 15th St. Pi-Rho America
deven@rpitsmts.bitnet <userfxb6@rpitsmts> Troy, NY 12180-2306 <<tionen>>
"Simple things should be simple and complex things should be possible." - A.K.paul@giza.cis.ohio-state.edu (Paul Placeway) (06/28/89)
Well, it's been two weeks since UseNIX. Len: can we *please* make a gnu.politics (or gnu.d or whatever). I'd just love to b**ch and moan about things, but _not_ in gnu.gcc... -- Paul