Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!rpi!tale From: tale@cs.rpi.edu (Dave Lawrence) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION: news.software.{transports,readers} Message-ID: <2576083F.65DD@rpi.edu> Date: 1 Dec 89 05:12:30 GMT References: <68@van-bc.UUCP> <5458@ncar.ucar.edu> Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY Lines: 32 I've withdrawn my previous support for this proposal. It seems I was getting a tad misled by what I like and what I think is right for me and confusing it with what is really best for everyone else. What's best for me? I'd probably do quite well with just one news.software group for all of the traffic regarding readers and transport mechanisms. I want to understand them all, at least on an elementary level, because I think it makes me a better news admin. Most people don't really care about the interoperability of it all -- quite rightly so, too; it is fine for them to be interested in just what they are running. news.software.{b,nntp,nn,&c} is okay as is without interjecting "transports" and "readers" hierarchies into them. It seems that for my personal newsreading desires it would be handy to have a reader which allowed me to file things where I wanted to see them -- ie, lump all of the news.software.* groups I read into one, just for reading. Or throw the alt.sources and the comp.sources.* groups which interest me into another pseudo-group of my reader. In article <5458@ncar.ucar.edu> steve@groucho.ucar.edu (Steve Emmerson) writes: The ability to subscribe to a newgroup dedicated to one's reader is more desireable than not, in my opinion. It is also analogous to the already existing situation whereby specific UNIX command-shells have their own dedicated newgroups. And which groups in The Big Seven are these? Dave -- (setq mail '("tale@cs.rpi.edu" "tale@ai.mit.edu" "tale@rpitsmts.bitnet")) "... the broader subject of usenet customs and other bizarre social phenomena." -- Phil Agre Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com