Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!star.cs.vu.nl!ast From: ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) Newsgroups: comp.os.minix Subject: Re: comp.os.minix splitup Message-ID: <9222@star.cs.vu.nl> Date: 6 Mar 91 16:17:22 GMT References: <30737@usc> <9146@star.cs.vu.nl> Sender: news@cs.vu.nl Organization: Fac. Wiskunde & Informatica, VU, Amsterdam Lines: 17 In article klamer@mi.eltn.utwente.nl (Klamer Schutte -- Universiteit Twente) writes: >(About a splitup to comp.os.minix & comp.os.minix.sources) > >This proposed splitup leaves me with a question: > >Where should fixes and patches go? I would assume that anything containing code would go to the sources group. Even if it is a large explanation and 1 line of cdiff. A disadvantage of calling the group comp.sources.minix is that probably the vast majority of the postings will be discussion + a cdiff. People who currently read comp.sources.unix will subscribe to comp.sources.minix and begin flaming everybody for not posting whole files. This will require endless explanations. Calling it comp.minix.sources will make clear that this is not a regular source group, but a subset of the MINIX discussion. Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl)