rfm@eng.sun.com (Rich McAllister) (07/27/90)
Remember that posting binaries to a discussion group is *very* rude to those people who receive news via modem and have to pay for connect time. Binaries have a very low signal to noise ratio, and many people don't want to pay to get them. This is why the comp.binaries hierarchy was created; this allows people who want to get binaries to get binaries, and people who don't want to get binaries not to get the bill. Until comp.binaries.ms-windows (or whatever) is voted on and created, the only polite place to post binaries is comp.binaries.ibm.pc. Now, personally, since the volume in c.b.i.p is so low, I don't see why a separate comp.binaries.ms-windows is needed, but the only way to solve that is to take a vote. Rich McAllister
bg11+@andrew.cmu.edu (Brian E. Gallew) (07/27/90)
I vote for binaries here.
markad@blake.acs.washington.edu (Mark Donnell) (07/28/90)
Since this seems to be the subject for which everyone is throwing in their 2 cents worth, here's my $1.29 (inflation ;-} ). Please post binaries to comp.sys.binaries or whatever it is and not to comp.windows.ms. Then how about a <SHORT> announcement to comp.windows.ms that so-and-so binaries are now available. That way people who regularly peruse the binaries will see all sorts of goodies and be happy, People who have low/expensive bandwidth won't waste alot of time and money uploading binaries which they have no use for or interest in, and those who need access to windows binaries thru News will be informed about all of those neat binaries and can go pick them up whenever they want. ps: Someone who desires binaries posted to comp.windows.ms said something like 'I dont want to waste alot of time looking thru all of the binaries in ...binaries... to find a few for windows'. Well alot of the rest of us dont want to waste alot of time looking thru all of the binaries in comp.windows.ms to find news and discussions. Mark k
waynev@hall.cray.com (Wayne Vieira) (07/28/90)
In article <5625@milton.u.washington.edu> markad@blake.acs.washington.edu (Mark Donnell) writes: > >ps: Someone who desires binaries posted to comp.windows.ms said something >like 'I dont want to waste alot of time looking thru all of the binaries >in ...binaries... to find a few for windows'. Well alot of the rest of us >dont want to waste alot of time looking thru all of the binaries in >comp.windows.ms to find news and discussions. Well, I guess it's a matter of opinion about where is the more appropriate place for windows binaries. I gather that you are suggesting that comp.binaries.ibm.pc is the best place, but there are quite a few people who disagree. I think c.b.i.p is too generalized, and since there is only one section for MSwindows stuff, I guess we'll put them here. If you don't like the clutter, then I suggest *YOU* do something about it and get a comp.binaries.windows.ms started. Whining isn't going to solve the problem. People will post binaries here as long as they don't see a better place. Let me tell you, no matter what *YOU* think, comp.binaries- .ibm.pc isn't it.
u803535@lanl.gov (Wayne A. Vieira) (07/28/90)
In article <5625@milton.u.washington.edu> markad@blake.acs.washington.edu (Mark Donnell) writes: > >ps: Someone who desires binaries posted to comp.windows.ms said something >like 'I dont want to waste alot of time looking thru all of the binaries >in ...binaries... to find a few for windows'. Well alot of the rest of us >dont want to waste alot of timelooking thru all of the binaries in >comp.windows.ms to find news and discussions. Well, I guess it's a matter of opinion about where is the more appropriate place for windows binaries. I gather that you are suggesting that comp.binaries.ibm.pc is the best place, but there are quite a few people who disagree. I think c.b.i.p is too generalized, and since there is only one section for MSwindows stuff, I guess we'll put them here. If you don't like the clutter, then I suggest *YOU* do something about it and get a comp.binaries.windows.ms started. Whining isn't going to solve the problem. People will post binaries here as long as they don't see a better place. Let me tell you, no matter what *YOU* think, comp.binaries- .ibm.pc isn't it. -- Wayne A. Vieira |Disclaimer: Right!!! Cray Research Inc. | As if someone would let *me* waynev@craywr.cray.com | speak on their behalf...
altman@sbgrad12.cs.sunysb.edu (Jeff Altman) (07/28/90)
This discussion has no place in comp.windows.ms. Please move it to alt.flame.
ron@woan.austin.ibm.com (Ronald S. Woan/2100000) (07/28/90)
In article <5625@milton.u.washington.edu>, markad@blake.acs.washington.edu (Mark Donnell) writes: Mark> Please post binaries to comp.sys.binaries or whatever it is and Mark> not to comp.windows.ms. Then how about a <SHORT> announcement to Mark> comp.windows.ms that so-and-so binaries are now available. The only problem with this scenario is the month (or so) lag time between sending something to the comp.binaries.ibm.pc moderator and actually seeing it in the newsgroup. With revisions occuring so frequently now, this could lead us to be very out of date. The thing to do is to upload to an agreed upon central repository like cica.cica.indiana.edu (pub/pc/win3) and making a short announcement in this newsgroup that it has been uploaded giving the full path with filename. This way, those of us without anonymous ftp, can get to the file using the bitftp mail server. Anyway, please stop uploading to just your favorite repository (i.e. terminator or whatever) and make sure that one (probably cica.cica.indiana.edu) always has the latest version of Windows 3 stuff. It would also be nice for someone with ftp access to volunteer to upload things to the repository for those of us without ftp access (we could mail something to them in uuencode/split format); any takers? +-----All Views Expressed Are My Own And Are Not Necessarily Shared By------+ +------------------------------My Employer----------------------------------+ + Ronald S. Woan @cs.utexas.edu:ibmchs!auschs!woan.austin.ibm.com!ron + + alternatives woan@peyote.cactus.org or woan@soda.berkeley.edu +
tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu (Tom Haapanen) (07/28/90)
Jeff Altman <altman@sbgrad12.cs.sunysb.edu> writes: > This discussion has no place in comp.windows.ms. > Please move it to alt.flame. Jeff is right that it really doesn't belong in comp.windows.ms. But it doesn't really belong in alt.flame, either: it belongs in news.groups. There is a very good chance that we could have comp.binaries.windows.ms if we wanted, and then we could have binaries where everybody would be happy about them. However, there's a catch: somebody needs to be a moderator. I will not volunteer; I already do comp.binaries.os2, and I don't want to double my unpaid workload. :) So, how about it? Any volunteers? [ \tom haapanen --- university of waterloo --- tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu ] [ "i don't even know what street canada is on" -- al capone ]
goodearl@world.std.com (Robert D Goodearl) (07/28/90)
In article <1990Jul28.011900.24190@watserv1.waterloo.edu> tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu (Tom Haapanen) writes: > >There is a very good chance that we could have comp.binaries.windows.ms >if we wanted, and then we could have binaries where everybody would be >happy about them. > >However, there's a catch: somebody needs to be a moderator. I will not >volunteer; I already do comp.binaries.os2, and I don't want to double my >unpaid workload. :) > Could you describe for us the work that is involved in being a moderator? Are the binaries groups required to be moderated? I certainly value the work that's done by the moderators, but don't necessarily have time to do it myself. Can it work as a shared responsibility? As for the ftp archives and those of us who don't have ftp access, would it be possible to get a mail server like the one running on the nasa archives? (You send it a message like "send index" or "send xyz" and it sends the file index or the specified file to you via mail.) Would something like this be practical? Thanks, Tom, for your constructive ideas. Any takers out there? Bob Goodearl -- goodearl@world.std.com
u803535@lanl.gov (Wayne A. Vieira) (07/29/90)
In article <1990Jul28.044401.7591@world.std.com> goodearl@world.std.com (Robert D Goodearl) writes: >In article <1990Jul28.011900.24190@watserv1.waterloo.edu> tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu (Tom Haapanen) writes: >> >>There is a very good chance that we could have comp.binaries.windows.ms >>if we wanted, and then we could have binaries where everybody would be >>happy about them. >> >>However, there's a catch: somebody needs to be a moderator. I will not >>volunteer; I already do comp.binaries.os2, and I don't want to double my >>unpaid workload. :) > >Could you describe for us the work that is involved in being a moderator? >Are the binaries groups required to be moderated? I certainly value >the work that's done by the moderators, but don't necessarily have time >to do it myself. Can it work as a shared responsibility? > Knowing nothing about the tasks of a moderator, I would be very interested in this too. If it is technically within reach of me (I do not have sys-admin or root on the machines I read from) I would be very interested in helping out. >Thanks, Tom, for your constructive ideas. Yes, my thanks too. I have been very frustrated (if you haven't been able to tell from the "flame-like" posts) that EVERY effort to start a comp.binaries.windows.ms has been shot down with suggestions that "we don't need one" or "there wouldn't be enough activity". Then later on, I listen (watch) people complain about the binaries appearing here. They may not really belong here, but they don't belong in comp.binaries. ibm.pc either! (at least not anymore than our postings belong in comp.ibm.pc.) Those sections are way too generalized to be of any use to Windows users or Windows Developers. I would like to apologize for my flame-fit. I really think we could use a binaries section for windows, and I really think we need one. Having USENET access doesn't necessarily mean having FTP access, and I find it very frustrating when people who have both binary AND discussion access (wether the bin access is from FTP or from a local BBS, etc.) go out of their way to tell everybody what "we don't need". have a nice day. -- Wayne A. Vieira |Disclaimer: Right!!! Cray Research Inc. | As if someone would let *me* waynev@craywr.cray.com | speak on their behalf...
markad@blake.acs.washington.edu (Mark Donnell) (07/29/90)
In article <58356@lanl.gov> u803535@beta.UUCP (Wayne A. Vieira) writes: >Well, I guess it's a matter of opinion about where is the more >appropriate place for windows binaries. ... >I think c.b.i.p is too generalized, >and since there is only one section for MSwindows stuff, I guess we'll put >them here. >If you don't like the clutter, then I suggest *YOU* do something >about it and get a comp.binaries.windows.ms started. >Whining isn't going to solve the problem. >People will post binaries here as long as they don't see a better place. >Let me tell you, no matter what *YOU* think, comp.binaries.ibm.pc isn't it. > > >-- >Wayne A. Vieira |Disclaimer: Right!!! >Cray Research Inc. | As if someone would let *me* >waynev@craywr.cray.com | speak on their behalf... ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ But you seem to speaking for alot of people here! I didn't (and don't) want to start a flame war. These sort of discussions have ne more place here than 11 part binaries. I did write a nice long reply discussing my opinions which I will post to news.groups. If anyone is interested in continuing this thread, how about doing so there. I am simply saying that long binaries (and most short binaries) have no place in a discussion group. They belong in a binary group. Comp.windows.ms.binaries would be fine, but since we dont have such a thing, it is MY OPINION that they should be posted to binaries.msdos or whatever, with an appropriate announcement here. If someone wants to start a new binaries group, fine. But until then would all of you kind hearted folks consider posting them to the existing binaries group? BTW: Aren't there enough newsgroups anyway? Why not try to combine binary groups when possible. Please direct all comments to news.groups. Please direct all flames to /dev/null or alt.flames or whatever. Mark markad@isdl.ee.washington.edu
mr@cica.indiana.edu (Michael Regoli) (07/30/90)
In <2948@awdprime.UUCP> ron@woan.austin.ibm.com (Ronald S. Woan/2100000) writes: >The thing to do is to upload to an agreed upon central repository like >cica.cica.indiana.edu (pub/pc/win3) and making a short announcement in >this newsgroup that it has been uploaded giving the full path with >filename. This way, those of us without anonymous ftp, can get to the >file using the bitftp mail server. Ron, could you please post a note on how to use bitftp? This may help relieve the pressure on my mailbox. (I'm flooded with requests from non-Internet users on how to access programs here at cica.) >cica.cica.indiana.edu) always has the latest version of Windows 3 >stuff. It would also be nice for someone with ftp access to volunteer >to upload things to the repository for those of us without ftp access >(we could mail something to them in uuencode/split format); any >takers? You could mail split-up uuencoded binaries to me directly to have them placed on cica.cica.indiana.edu [129.79.20.22]. Please be certain that the mail message includes a brief description of the program. -- michael regoli mr@cica.cica.indiana.edu regoli@iubacs.bitnet ...rutgers!iuvax!cica!mr
davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) (08/02/90)
In article <1990Jul28.044401.7591@world.std.com> goodearl@world.std.com (Robert D Goodearl) writes: | In article <1990Jul28.011900.24190@watserv1.waterloo.edu> tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu (Tom Haapanen) writes: | > | >There is a very good chance that we could have comp.binaries.windows.ms | >if we wanted, and then we could have binaries where everybody would be | >happy about them. Since a number of windows programs have been included in submissions to c.b.i.p, do you really think you need your own newsgroup? -- bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen) "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) (08/02/90)
In article <58454@lanl.gov> u803535@beta.UUCP (Wayne A. Vieira) writes: | >>However, there's a catch: somebody needs to be a moderator. I will not | >>volunteer; I already do comp.binaries.os2, and I don't want to double my | >>unpaid workload. :) | > | >Could you describe for us the work that is involved in being a moderator? | >Are the binaries groups required to be moderated? I certainly value | >the work that's done by the moderators, but don't necessarily have time | >to do it myself. Can it work as a shared responsibility? I guess it could, if you had very dedicated people. I find that it's hard to get people to do reviews, even after they offer, and only about 30% of what I get is (a) in the correct format, and (b) has a description of what it is and does. | > | Knowing nothing about the tasks of a moderator, I would be very interested | in this too. If it is technically within reach of me (I do not have | sys-admin or root on the machines I read from) I would be very interested | in helping out. Let me give you a typical case example: the submission comes in, out of order. You use the "put in order" tool, then save the parts, use the "strip the garbage tool" to find the encoded binary, then convert to a binary file, and (sometimes) a useful explanation of the program and useful return address for the submitter. You may need to read all the documentation and run the program to determine what it does, then use the "write a review" tool. In many cases the tool is a heavy duty editor. You unpack the archive, which is in any archive format you ever heard of, then virus check it with several programs. Then you review it (usually) or farm it out for review. Then you repack it into the standard archive type, encode it, break it into pieces, add the explanation to the 1st part, headers to every part, then submit it. This assumes that you don't get something as a self unpacking archive, in which case you need to unpack on a machine which can be low level formatted if you are hit with a virus. After you develop the right tools for doing all this, you should be able to do most submissions in an hour. | Yes, my thanks too. I have been very frustrated (if you haven't been able | to tell from the "flame-like" posts) that EVERY effort to start | a comp.binaries.windows.ms has been shot down with suggestions that | "we don't need one" or "there wouldn't be enough activity". Then | later on, I listen (watch) people complain about the binaries appearing here. | They may not really belong here, but they don't belong in comp.binaries. | ibm.pc either! What kind of volume are you talking about here? Are there ten programs a day or five a month? If you generate even five programs a week you may need a group, if it's less than that maybe just a reviewer for c.b.i.p. Would the volume be as high if a moderator had dropped dups, etc? -- bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen) "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
tomr@ashtate (Tom Rombouts) (08/03/90)
In article <2379@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.com (bill davidsen) writes: > Since a number of windows programs have been included in submissions >to c.b.i.p, do you really think you need your own newsgroup? Would this plan make everyone happy for now? 1. Compile (or pseudo-compile, 'ar 'ar) a list of these posted binaries, including the date posted, number of pieces (if relevant), a brief description and where they will be archived. 2. Include such a listing in the Windows FAQ file that will likely be developed real soon now. Tom Rombouts Torrance Techie tomr@ashtate.A-T.com V:(213)538-7108
andy@mks.com (Andy Toy) (08/15/90)
tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu (Tom Haapanen) writes: | There has been quite a bit of discussion about this in comp.windows.ms, and | far too many binaries floating through that group. davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.com (bill davidsen) writes: > I'm a bit unhappy with the volume of binary postings in the windows >group, as you say "far too many." goodearl@world.std.com (Robert Goodearl) writes: 'As a regular reader of and contributor to cwm, I'm sad to say that some folks 'there don't seem to care. There seems to be a lack of understanding of and 'respect for the cooperative rules of the net. I (and others) have tried to 'make some reasonable arguments for posting binaries to cbip, and while 'we may have had some effect, binaries do continue to be posted to the cwm. ' 'If any of you have suggestions for how to educate the readers of cwm, I'd 'certainly be appreciative. Well, if too many people post binaries to comp.windows.ms then some sites will stop feeding it, some will want it to be moderated, some will try to create comp.binaries.mswindows, some will flame the posters and tell them to post c.b.i.p, and others will predict the imminent death of USENET. :-) -- Andy Toy, Mortice Kern Systems Inc., Internet: andy@mks.com 35 King Street North, Waterloo, UUCP: uunet!watmath!mks!andy Ontario, CANADA N2J 2W9 Phone: 519-884-2251 FAX: 519-884-8861