Path: utzoo!utstat!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!intercon!amanda@mermaid.intercon.com
From: amanda@mermaid.intercon.com (Amanda Walker)
Newsgroups: news.software.b
Subject: Re: Our friend, the GMT date.
Message-ID: <1605@intercon.com>
Date: 6 Dec 89 23:25:50 GMT
References: <4364@helios.ee.lbl.gov> <14810@well.UUCP> <1989Dec3.210413.27043@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu> <56239@looking.on.ca> <1989Dec5.142032.7706@talos.uucp> <1601@intercon.com> <1989Dec6.031329.13569@utzoo.uucp> <57592@looking.on.ca>
Sender: news@intercon.com
Reply-To: amanda@mermaid.intercon.com (Amanda Walker)
Lines: 21

In article <57592@looking.on.ca>, brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton) writes:
> Another improvement would be speed.  [stuff about not unpacking batches]

Exactly.

> But on the whole, when you add the reader breaking issue, it isn't
> worth it.

This is part of my motivation for thinking about doing something new.
There are a *lot* of things that end up not being worth it as changes
to USENET, but are definitely worth thinking about for a new design.

Sorry if I didn't make this clear.

I'm not even thinking of things running "in parallel" to news, such as
ClariNet or whatever.  It's probably worth it to support UUCP, because of
the Telebit Trailblazer if nothing else, but my thoughts have been focused
on retooling news from the ground up, as it were.

--Amanda
--