Xref: utzoo news.groups:27990 comp.sys.acorn:528 Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!star.cs.vu.nl!gpvos From: gpvos@cs.vu.nl (Gerben 'P' Vos) Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.sys.acorn,eunet.micro.acorn Subject: Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION: comp.binaries.acorn Message-ID: <9066@star.cs.vu.nl> Date: 20 Feb 91 09:43:28 GMT References: <1763@svin02.info.win.tue.nl> <1991Feb19.100159.19741@maths.tcd.ie> Sender: news@cs.vu.nl Followup-To: news.groups Lines: 24 chughes@maths.tcd.ie (Conrad Hughes) writes: >In <1763@svin02.info.win.tue.nl> rcpieter@wsinti02.info.win.tue.nl (Tiggr) writes: >>The creation of both a comp.sources.acorn and a comp.binaries.acorn has >>been propsed. The question is whether or not this is wanted. What is >>the general opinion on this (I need to know before I can issue a proper >>call for votes). >Judging by the fact that nobody has posted binaries in the past few weeks, so >they can post to comp.binaries.acorn, I'd say the general opinion is that it >_is_ wanted. Otherwise we get no more binaries :-( Of course, almost everyone wants the binaries group. But, do you want only a binaries group (which may also carry sources), or both a sources group and a binaries group? It looks like most people are neutral on this. Any ideas? And BTW, please keep the discussion in news.groups . I've redirected follow-ups to this. - Gerben -- --- Gerben Vos - Aconet: BIGBEN!Gerben Vos - Internet: gpvos@cs.vu.nl ---- Should I put something funny here?