Xref: utzoo news.groups:24143 comp.unix.misc:240
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!yale!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: What's next for comp.unix?
Message-ID: <21799:Oct321:15:0290@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 3 Oct 90 21:15:02 GMT
References: <10833:Oct221:07:0590@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <2716@crdos1.crd.ge.COM>
Organization: IR
Lines: 18

In article <2716@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.com (bill davidsen) writes:
> In article <10833:Oct221:07:0590@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
> | Whatever the fate of unix-wizards, I'd like to see two new groups:
> |   comp.unix.futures  The future of UNIX and of its derivatives
>   Sounds good, although there's not much sustained traffic currently.

A noticeable portion of the u-w traffic would have been perfect for
comp.unix.futures. I'd say it was my favorite part of the group.

> |   comp.unix.kernel   Current UNIX kernel discussions
>   Maybe internals -> kernel, assuming the esoterica passes?

Well, I had thought that internals would be the right name, but the word
is ambiguous; some people take it as just kernel, and others take it as
both kernel and programmer. I really do want a group for the kinds of
discussions that the AT&T license doesn't let you participate in.

---Dan