Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site sdcsvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!allyn
From: allyn@sdcsvax.UUCP (Allyn Fratkin)
Newsgroups: net.news.group
Subject: Re: net.sources.pc?
Message-ID: <650@sdcsvax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 4-Feb-85 12:20:23 EST
Article-I.D.: sdcsvax.650
Posted: Mon Feb  4 12:20:23 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 6-Feb-85 05:22:57 EST
References: <2866@umcp-cs.UUCP> <176@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Organization: U.C. San Diego
Lines: 24

I don't see any point in having a net.sources.{pc,msdos}.  Just how much
msdos software have you seen in net.sources recently?  Very little.
What makes you think msdos sources will suddenly appear if a net.sources.msdos
group is created?  Feeling left out is not a good reason to create a group.

Just because you have/want msdos source doesn't mean you can't use net.sources
and net.wanted.sources.  It's there for *any* source you care to distribute
or want to find, not just Unix stuff.  For example, there were some Korn shell 
procedures posted there a while back, and the Korn shell is only available 
inside AT&T.  There was a lot of MacTraffic, so that's why a separate group 
was created.

So go ahead and post your msdos software to net.sources.  I'm not totally
against a net.sources.msdos group.  If there is a good bit of msdos traffic,
there should be a group.  But not until then.

For those on the arpanet, usc-isib keeps the info-ibmpc library of public-
domain programs.  Mail to info-ibmpc-request@usc-isib.arpa for information.
-- 
 From the virtual mind of Allyn Fratkin            allyn@UCSD              or
                          UCSD EMU/Pascal Project  {ucbvax, decvax, ihnp4}
                          U.C. San Diego                       !sdcsvax!allyn

 "Generally you don't see that kind of behavior in a major appliance."