Path: utzoo!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!ox.com!ox.com!emv
From: emv@ox.com (Ed Vielmetti)
Newsgroups: alt.sources.d
Subject: Re: NON-SOURCE POSTINGS CONSIDERED HARMFUL!
Message-ID: <EMV.91Jan19150123@crane.aa.ox.com>
Date: 19 Jan 91 21:01:23 GMT
References: <1991Jan17.224403.16050@convex.com>
	<1991Jan19.162832.10983@scuzzy.in-berlin.de>
Sender: usenet@ox.com (Usenet News Administrator)
Distribution: alt
Organization: OTA Limited Partnership, Ann Arbor MI.
Lines: 15
In-Reply-To: src@scuzzy.in-berlin.de's message of 19 Jan 91 16:28:32 GMT

In article <1991Jan19.162832.10983@scuzzy.in-berlin.de> src@scuzzy.in-berlin.de (Heiko Blume) writes:

   so let's discuss: are patches to a generally available program "source code" ?

usually.  depends if they are "official patches" (yes) or "unofficial
patches" (not usually).

   if not, where the f*ck shall one post patches? alt.test? junk?

comp.sources.bugs often gets patches.  alt.sources sometimes gets
patches.  a few sites around the world have an "alt.sources.patches"
group which hardly ever gets patches, though it's the right name more
or less.

--Ed