tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff) (12/19/89)
In article <1512@massormetrix.ida.liu.se> mip@massormetrix.ida.liu.se (Mikael Patel) writes: >A Christmas present from Sweden to the Forth group. also since it's UNREASONABLE to expect Usenet FORTH enthusiasts to be subscribed to comp.lang.forth (right?) we'll crosspost it to alt.sources! >The environment consists of eight packages and has a total >size of 350K. ... [followed by a mountain of source] OK Ed Vielmetti I take it all back. There IS something worse than re-posting 30k source postings from other groups.... :-( -- "We walked on the moon -- (( Tom Neff you be polite" )) tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET
kaul@icarus.eng.ohio-state.edu (Rich Kaul) (12/19/89)
In article <15023@bfmny0.UU.NET> tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff) writes:
also since it's UNREASONABLE to expect Usenet FORTH enthusiasts to be
subscribed to comp.lang.forth (right?) we'll crosspost it to alt.sources!
...
OK Ed Vielmetti I take it all back. There IS something worse than
re-posting 30k source postings from other groups.... :-(
I'm afraid I don't get it. The message was properly cross posted, so
there shouldn't be any problem if you have reasonably installed news
software -- you should only have to read it once and have it stored on
your disk once. And there may be system administrators who *don't*
read comp.lang.forth but who have users who use or would like to use
forth but don't read news. There's also the fact that some sites
maintain an archive of alt.sources but not comp.lang.forth. This
makes it nice when someone asks for a PD forth; they can be told to
look for an alt.sources archive site.
As for all the hubub about reposting sources, I agree that the volume
of stuff in alt.sources is a bit too high with the reposting, although
I think that the reposting is valuable. Perhaps a quick summary of
each source can be posted every few days in another group. That set of
pointers could be very valuable.
-rich
-=-
Rich Kaul | "It is dangerous to be sincere unless
The Ohio State University | you are also stupid." -Bernard Shawallbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery) (12/20/89)
As quoted from <15023@bfmny0.UU.NET> by tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff): +--------------- | In article <1512@massormetrix.ida.liu.se> mip@massormetrix.ida.liu.se (Mikael Patel) writes: | >A Christmas present from Sweden to the Forth group. | | also since it's UNREASONABLE to expect Usenet FORTH enthusiasts to be | subscribed to comp.lang.forth (right?) we'll crosspost it to alt.sources! +--------------- It is considered impolite to post sources or binaries to a discussion group. That led to my creating comp.binaries.ibm.pc (since passed on to others) because binaries weren't any more welcome in comp.sources.misc. Flame all you want, but *existing* precedents are against you. If anything, the crime committed was posting it to the Forth group as well as alt.sources. And in any case, I am glad to see the TILE distribution -- and no, I do not read comp.lang.forth. ++Brandon -- Brandon S. Allbery allbery@NCoast.ORG, BALLBERY (MCI Mail), ALLBERY (Delphi) uunet!hal.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery ncoast!allbery@hal.cwru.edu bsa@telotech.uucp *(comp.sources.misc mail to comp-sources-misc[-request]@backbone.site, please)* *Third party vote-collection service: send mail to allbery@uunet.uu.net (ONLY)* expnet.all: Experiments in *net management and organization. Mail me for info.
bill@twwells.com (T. William Wells) (12/21/89)
In article <15023@bfmny0.UU.NET> tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff) writes:
: also since it's UNREASONABLE to expect Usenet FORTH enthusiasts to be
: subscribed to comp.lang.forth (right?) we'll crosspost it to alt.sources!
Wrong premise, wrong conclusion. I'm no forth enthusiast. But I'll
keep the Forth posting. Why? Because I *study* things like that.
But there is NO WAY I'll subscribe to any of several dozen MORE
groups just on the off chance that someone will post something
useful.
Oh yes, a friend of mine I was talking to yesterday said
essentially the same thing....
: OK Ed Vielmetti I take it all back. There IS something worse than
: re-posting 30k source postings from other groups.... :-(
Yes indeed. Your drivel on this subject.
I have *already* benefitted from Ed's work. I have *not*
benefitted from your whining.
---
Bill { uunet | novavax | ankh | sunvice } !twwells!bill
bill@twwells.comkensmith@cs.Buffalo.EDU (Ken Smith) (12/25/89)
In article <15023@bfmny0.UU.NET> tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff) writes: >also since it's UNREASONABLE to expect Usenet FORTH enthusiasts to be >subscribed to comp.lang.forth (right?) we'll crosspost it to alt.sources! I'm a fairly typical system administrator for a fairly typical university. I don't read comp.lang.forth because beyond knowing that it's a programming language I haven't got the foggiest idea what it is. However I stashed the forth they posted and will be installing it because it showed up in a newsgroup that I do read and I know there are people here who would find it useful. We system administrators LIKE having things like the Tile Forth Release posted here so we don't have to read every single newsgroup to get things that our users might find useful. If you're flaming anything here it should be a flame for posting the release to comp.lang.forth instead of posting a brief message saying that "The Tile Forth Release has been posted to alt.sources." >[followed by a mountain of source] Heaven forbid we should have source code in alt.sources! >OK Ed Vielmetti I take it all back. There IS something worse than >re-posting 30k source postings from other groups.... :-( Re-posting whole articles may be a waste, but properly cross-posting requires changing a couple fields in an inode and one extra directory entry for the link. If your news reading software has any intelligence at all you won't even see it twice should you happen to read both newsgroups it got posted to. I don't see what you're so upset about. I'm normally pretty silent in these flame wars but don't want your message to stop others from posting their code here where I'll see it as opposed to comp.lang.forth where I (and I am willing to bet...) lots of other typical system administrators will miss something useful. Ken Smith internet: kensmith@cs.buffalo.edu bitnet: kensmith@sunybcs.BITNET uucp: ..!{boulder,decvax,rutgers}!sunybcs!kensmith
tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff) (12/27/89)
Permit me to clarify my previous posting, since there have been a couple of concerned followups and at least one bit of technicolor rudeness. Of course it's great to post sources here, and of course FORTH is of interest to some fraction of the readership. But seven- and eight-part megapostings should not normally appear here. Most of the people who need something like TILE FORTH could easily get it by anonymous ftp from an Internet archive site. It would be enough to post a pointer to it here and/or in comp.archives. The INET distribution is easily overburdened. I am suggesting that short sources are best for alt.sources. I welcome reasoned discussion on this. A recent posting exhibited unseemly personal venom and reflects poorly on all of us, not just the indiscreet poster. -- 'We have luck only with women -- not spacecraft!' \\ Tom Neff -- R. Kremnev, builder of failed Soviet FOBOS probes // tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET
tim@nwnexus.WA.COM (Tim Anderson) (12/29/89)
Tom, I disagree! To those of us w/o FTP access (yes, there are a few out there) postings such as these (and various mail servers) are the ONLY way we get a variety of source code to peruse. Now I just have to try to shoe horn it into DOS land (hee, hee, snicker snicker!)... No cute signature for me...