Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!pollux.usc.edu!kjh
From: kjh@pollux.usc.edu (Kenneth J. Hendrickson)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: comp.os.minix splitup
Message-ID: <31178@usc>
Date: 19 Mar 91 21:52:15 GMT
References: <5M.9Z65@xds13.ferranti.com> <9302@star.cs.vu.nl> <3+2AN33@xds13.ferranti.com>
Sender: news@usc
Organization: EE-Systems, USC, Los Angeles
Lines: 27
Nntp-Posting-Host: pollux.usc.edu

In article <3+2AN33@xds13.ferranti.com> peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>If Andy won't post to a moderated group, that pretty much shoots that
>whole idea down. :-<

How about a moderated group for official new releases of Minix?
And officially approved bug fixes?

>Now that you've brought the idea up, how do people feel about a ".sources"
>and a ".patches" group, both?

I would like to see a group .patches, for officially sanctioned upgrades
and bug fixes.  This group should be moderated.  If not moderated, great
pressure must be put on all of us not to post until we get approval from
official sources (the testing group?) to do so.

The .sources group would be for anything.  This includes non-approved
bug fixes, and whole programs (like sc, c68, c386, etc.), and everything
in between.

I think it would be good to have a moderated group for officially
sanctioned stuff, and it is obviously necessary to have a non-moderated
group for the masses to dump into.  For me, it is sometimes hard to
determine just what is officially approved, and what isn't.

-- 
favourite oxymorons:   student athlete, military justice, mercy killing
Ken Hendrickson N8DGN/6       kjh@usc.edu      ...!uunet!usc!pollux!kjh