lpape@ficc.ferranti.com (Lori Pape) (04/19/91)
I appreciate Joachim's recent posting of the sources for TASS, and I believe sources SHOULD be allowed to be posted to this newsgroup. I hope others will voice their opinions in this "controversy". What do "ya'll" think? Lori lpape@ficc.ferranti.com
rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) (04/22/91)
In article <GAUAZW2@xds7.ferranti.com> lpape@ficc.ferranti.com (Lori Pape) writes: >I appreciate Joachim's recent posting of the sources for TASS, and >I believe sources SHOULD be allowed to be posted to this newsgroup. > >I hope others will voice their opinions in this "controversy". > >What do "ya'll" think? Well, it's an either/or situation. Either we post sources here or we set up a Coherent sources group ASAP. Rick Kelly rmk@rmkhome.UUCP frog!rmkhome!rmk rmk@frog.UUCP
matthew1@garfield.cs.mun.ca (Matthew J. Newhook) (04/23/91)
rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes: >In article <GAUAZW2@xds7.ferranti.com> lpape@ficc.ferranti.com (Lori Pape) writes: >>I appreciate Joachim's recent posting of the sources for TASS, and >>I believe sources SHOULD be allowed to be posted to this newsgroup. >> >>I hope others will voice their opinions in this "controversy". >> >>What do "ya'll" think? >Well, it's an either/or situation. Either we post sources here or we set >up a Coherent sources group ASAP. Don't you guys think that it's completely pointless to post the *same* sources that appear in comp.os.minix? This seems to me like a complete waste of bandwidth... sure post patches (if the minix versions don't work), but the entire source again??? >Rick Kelly rmk@rmkhome.UUCP frog!rmkhome!rmk rmk@frog.UUCP Matthew Newhook -- ----------------matthew1@garfield.cs.mun.ca "Living in the limelight; the universal dream for those who wish to seem. Those who wish to be must put aside the alienation, get on with the facination, the real relation, the underlying theme" - Rush
shawn@jpradley.jpr.com (Shawn Blair) (04/30/91)
In article <1991Apr23.121024.16716@garfield.cs.mun.ca> matthew1@garfield.cs.mun.ca (Matthew J. Newhook) writes: > >Don't you guys think that it's completely pointless to post the *same* >sources that appear in comp.os.minix? This seems to me like a complete >waste of bandwidth... sure post patches (if the minix versions don't work), >but the entire source again??? > I hate to see a waste of bandwidth, but I also hate to waste my time reading newsgroups that don't contribute something to my needs (be they interesting or not). To maintain a common source group would simplify the source problem. Posting patches to this group or the comp.os.group would reduce multiple postings of specific source. Until something is resolved with a common or uncommon :) sources group, I think we should allow posting of source to comp.os.coherent. Needless to say if the original source has been posted recently to comp.os.minix, post just the patches and save bandwidth. But let the comp.os.coherent group know what has been posted to comp.os.minix so we don't have to guess or constantly peruse the minix group. _______________________________________________________________________________ -- Shawn R. Blair ~ shawn@jpr.com -- -- ...murphy!jpradley!rpmc!{srblair!}shawn (hourly) -- -- uunet!sir-alan!admiral!rpmc!{srblair!}shawn (weekly) --
kent@sparky.IMD.Sterling.COM (Kent Landfield) (06/04/91)
Please read this article... In article <1991Jun3.210518.1923@risky.ecs.umass.edu> kimmel@risky.ecs.umass.edu (Mathew Kimmel) writes: >In article <15479153@mailgsm.mendelson.com> gsm@mailgsm.mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) writes: >>This is an explanation, not a flame, so please don't be insulted. :-) > >[stuff about posting sources deleted] > >Points taken, although other people (including Joachim) have disagreed >with you. Would it be better to post Coherent sources on, say, >alt.sources or comp.sources.misc? In the absence of a comp.sources.coherent newsgroup, I would like to see Coherent sources posted to comp.sources.misc so that they would be archived and available to people in the future. The archiving for alt.sources is spotty at best. >>I also have some complaints about how the file was sent: >> >> 1. It is too big to be edited with the STANDARD COHERENT EDITOR "me". > >Do you mean the shar file? I don't really see any other way to post >multiple files. If you had trouble unsharring it, try getting the >latest version of sh from mwcbbs, or cshar from piggy. If you mean one >of the source files, I edited them all with no problem using elvis. There are other ways but the *best* way to post multiple files is via cshar. This problem will keep popping up. People will flame others who wish to contribute their creations and hard work to their community when the sources are posted to this newsgroup. The authors will not want to contribute for fear of being this months target in the group. This group is no different than any other in this respect. This same pattern has been seen before and will be seen again. There has been a lot of discussion about where to post sources earlier in this group. Some wanted all sources posted to this group. Some wanted to create comp.sources.coherent. Others wanted to merge Minix and Coherent sources into a small unix sources group.(Yuk!) Some thought it was too soon after this group's creation to form a sources group. As moderator of comp.sources.misc I welcome any and all Coherent sources. I will gladly post anything submitted and assure that it gets archived on uunet and various other c.s.misc archives. I suspect that some time in the future there will be a comp.sources.coherent. Until that time, please do not be afraid to contribute your sources to the community. Send them to .. "sources-misc@uunet.uu.net" or to "sources-misc@sparky.imd.sterling.com". So now that we have dealt with the short term problem :-), what does it take to *solve* the problem ? First it takes a volunteer willing to spend at least 10 hours per week. The person should have Internet access to make the job much easier. A Request For Discussion (RFD) needs to be sent to David Lawerence <tale@cs.rpi.edu>. After a 30 day discussion period then a vote is taken. If the results of the vote show the net thinks that the group is needed then you have a new sources group. If someone thinks that they could do a good job as moderator and are able to supply a "consistent" commitment then propose a charter for the source group and get it started. There really are only two acceptable solutions in my mind. Post Coherent sources to comp.sources.misc or form your own sources newsgroup... I will help out in any way that I can. Please feel free to send me mail if you have additional questions. -Kent+ -- Kent Landfield INTERNET: kent@sparky.IMD.Sterling.COM Sterling Software, IMD UUCP: uunet!sparky!kent Phone: (402) 291-8300 FAX: (402) 291-4362 Please send comp.sources.misc-related mail to kent@uunet.uu.net.
don@zl2tnm.gp.co.nz (Don Stokes) (06/08/91)
kent@sparky.IMD.Sterling.COM (Kent Landfield) writes: > In the absence of a comp.sources.coherent newsgroup, I would like to see > Coherent sources posted to comp.sources.misc so that they would be archived > and available to people in the future. The archiving for alt.sources is > spotty at best. Hang on.... comp.os.coherent is a Coherent-specific group. comp.sources.misc isn't. I (for example) don't get comp.sources.misc -- I take a limited feed from a less limited feed that also doesn't get c.s.m, since most of c.s.m is of no interest to me or my feed site. Fortunately for me, I happen to be sysadmin of both sites 8-) so can arrange this if necessary (but would rather not), however, this may not be convenient to other sites. It would certainly be a retrograde step for uucp-only sites that have to pay for news -- they're still stuck with no ftp and expensive calls to mwcbbs (tolls are prohibitive at 2400bps from outside the U.S.), and to get sources by carrying comp.sources.misc would mean carrying (and paying for) a whole lot of stuff that isn't really usable. Really, comp.os.coherent is the place for Coherent-specific stuff, is it not? If the consensus is that the place to put stuff is c.s.m, I'd go with that -- but I'm not keen. > There has been a lot of discussion about where to post sources earlier in thi > group. Some wanted all sources posted to this group. Some wanted to create > comp.sources.coherent. Others wanted to merge Minix and Coherent sources > into a small unix sources group.(Yuk!) Some thought it was too soon after > this group's creation to form a sources group. The ultimate solution is a separate sources newsgroup -- whether it can be got past a vote is another matter entirely however.... Don Stokes, ZL2TNM / / don@zl2tnm.gp.co.nz (home) Systems Programmer /GP/ GP PRINT LIMITED Wellington, don@gp.co.nz (work) __________________/ / ---------------- New_Zealand__________________________
kent@uunet.UU.NET (Kent Landfield - comp.sources.misc) (06/09/91)
In article <5k8633w163w@zl2tnm.gp.co.nz> Don Stokes <don@zl2tnm.gp.co.nz> writes: >I (for example) don't get comp.sources.misc -- I take a limited feed >from a less limited feed that also doesn't get c.s.m, since most of >c.s.m is of no interest to me or my feed site. That is too bad. You are missing a lot of good sources lately... Coherent sources too... :-) >kent@sparky.IMD.Sterling.COM (Kent Landfield) writes: > >> There has been a lot of discussion about where to post sources earlier in thi >> group. Some wanted all sources posted to this group. Some wanted to create >> comp.sources.coherent. Others wanted to merge Minix and Coherent sources >> into a small unix sources group.(Yuk!) Some thought it was too soon after >> this group's creation to form a sources group. > >The ultimate solution is a separate sources newsgroup -- whether it can >be got past a vote is another matter entirely however.... Creating comp.sources.coherent is the real answer as I have stated before. If you do not try to solve the problem it will continue to pop up every time someone wants to post sources to the "discussion" newsgroup comp.os.coherent. If you want people to contribute sources freely to the community you need to provide them a path to do so that has no "friction" involved. Otherwise, people will not want to hassle with it. To promote the free exchange of software, authors need a channel setup for that purpose. Not one where they become the target of the week for wanting to better the community.... -Kent+ -- Kent Landfield INTERNET: kent@sparky.IMD.Sterling.COM Sterling Software, IMD UUCP: uunet!sparky!kent Phone: (402) 291-8300 FAX: (402) 291-4362 Please send comp.sources.misc-related mail to kent@uunet.uu.net.