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