Xref: utzoo news.groups:16343 comp.os.os2:544
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcsun!sunic!tut!hydra!hylka!kulokari
From: kulokari@cc.helsinki.fi
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.os.os2
Subject: Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION of comp.binaries.os2
Message-ID: <1732.25ae7876@cc.helsinki.fi>
Date: 13 Jan 90 00:38:13 GMT
References: <676@banyan.UUCP> <1990Jan9.220230.14165@uwasa.fi> <1990Jan10.193337.28096@agate.berkeley.edu> <5083@loper.cs.vu.nl> <1581@castle.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 6

For me it is okay to have separate groups for sources and binaries. But
why bother? There has not been a lot of discussion. The interesting
traffic in comp.os.os2 *is* the sources and binaries. Why replace one
lively group by two lively and one quiet? If you want to yak about OS/2 vs.
Unix vs. Mac, isn't comp.sys.ibmpc enough? After all, OS/2 is just another
operating system for the (high-end) ibmpc's.