jac@sparky.rutgers.edu (Jonathan A. Chandross) (09/05/90)
Submitted-by: jac Posting-number: Volume 1, Administrivia: 4 I've bundled up the comments on this. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry W. Virden <osu-cis!chemabs!lwv27> you certainly DO want to distinguish between DOS and PRODOS as well as GS/OS. Lets see - the types of things that I archive around here are: administrative tools communication tools database tools demos editors games graphics languages (includes assemblers, compilers and interpreters) mail tools math tools printing tools shell tools (in the apple world, the source for ecp8 is available for free for example, as is the source for several ecp compatible utilities) sound tools subroutines utilities Now these are for unix in general. For the Apple II, I have programs in categories like: cda communications demos gsos database/spreadsheets dos33 games graphics inits misc - ALWAYS have one of these!! nda prodos8 tech notes strictly for the apple contributions text files-text notes on building hard drives, debugging programs, etc. unix tools tools-to build or extract files utilities - things that do not fall into other categories nicely virus fighters You might want to break things down something like: ii specific iie specific iic specific iigs specific ii general dos 33 specific prodos 8 specific gs/os specific games das inits disk utilities database/spreadsheets languages forth pascal c scheme dos general - Medin's kermit falls into here at least! and so forth. [ Looks like a combinatorial explosion if everything is divided up into // specific, //e specific, etc. Maybe just keep the categories and use a readme to distinguish between the various machines/OSs? ] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bruce Kahn <bkahn@archive.webo.dg.com> How about sounds/music? As an alternative, why not archive the postings according to the volume they are posted in like most other archives do? It would make things easier by just being able to say 'This posting superceeds my previous posting in v01_014' or 'Here is a patch for v01_132...' On the other hand keeping things according to category tends to remove older versions of the program. Hmmm, decisions, decisions... |> |> I don't know if a dos/prodos distinction is needed. I also don't |> know if beneath each directory should be a directory for each |> language. That is, |> graphics/pascal/fractals |> graphics/applesoft/fractals.part1 |> graphics/applesoft/fractals.part2 |> graphics/applesoft/fractals.part3 |> graphics/c/chaos_game |> .... |> This seems a bit too verbose for my liking. Distinguishing between the sources is not a bad idea. In fact, it would make alot of people happier if you did. Imagine spending the time and effort to get down a package to find that you dont have the TML Pascal or Orca/Pascal compiler you would need to build it. Keep the distinction!! [Well, maybe there should be a READ.ME in each archive directory indicating what the language/hardware requirements are for each packag.] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Kopper <dave@mystie.webo.dg.com> On to a directory structure: Why not just sort things by volume number? (like most other archived source newsgroups) With an accurate index, it won't matter which way the directories are setup. [Because people like to prowl around in the archives and loath to look things up.] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan A. Chandross Internet: jac@paul.rutgers.edu UUCP: rutgers!paul.rutgers.edu!jac