Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ttrdc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!ltuxa!ttrdc!levy
From: levy@ttrdc.UUCP (Daniel R. Levy)
Newsgroups: net.news.group
Subject: Re: net.sources.d - its time has come
Message-ID: <736@ttrdc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 12-Feb-86 18:29:12 EST
Article-I.D.: ttrdc.736
Posted: Wed Feb 12 18:29:12 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 14-Feb-86 02:17:41 EST
References: <1018@burl.UUCP> <875@masscomp.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T, Computer Systems Division, Skokie, IL
Lines: 71

<Oh oh here it comes.  Watch out boy, it'll chew you up! \
Oh oh here it comes.  The LINE EATER!  [Line eater]>

In article <875@masscomp.UUCP>, carlton@masscomp.UUCP (Carlton Hommel) writes:
>net.sources.d seems to get discussed in net.news.group every 9 months.
>The main objection to it is that sites archive net.sources, which gives
>them net.sources.bugs but not net.wanted.sources.
>
>I feel it is time to bite the bullet.  net.sources currently is not worth
>archiving.

Your opinion only of course.  You cannot make that decision for many thousands
of sites across the board.  Some do NOT get mod.sources as a newsgroup and
net.sources is better than nothing.

>Those sites still wasting disk space on net.sources should
>fix their software.

Y'mean, rmgroup net.sources I'm sure

>Thus, I also propose that net.wanted.sources should
>be renamed net.sources.wanted.
>
>An automatic monthly posting should go out on net.sources, similar to the
>net.general posting.  It does seem to have cut down on random noise on
>net.general; perhaps it could do the same for net.sources.
>
>I have been one of those "little Hitlers," fighting the secret war to keep
>net.sources pure.  Its like spitting into the wind - even with rn's
>automatic inclusion of the reply message, and uupath finding the shortest
>path back to them.

Down with Hitlers

>
>Another software solution would be to have some backbone sites add a
>    Followup-to: net.sources.d
>line to every article in their spool directory.
>
>What follows the .signature break is the "little Hitler" birdie that I have
>been sending out to misusers.
>
>    Carl Hommel
>    ...!masscomp!carlton
>
>--

> [rude note about 'netiquette']

I propose that indirect references to works that have been sent to mod.sources
be allowed in net.sources EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE NOT THEMSELVES SOURCE CODE.
If you wanna be picky, it's "documentation" -- documentation of where to get
the code, such as oversize things like TVX which are 100% guaranteed to get
lost in net.sources.  People who don't get mod.sources as a newsgroup can
still send mail to the moderator asking for copies.  (Perhaps manpages only
could be posted along with a message saying where to get the code itself from
the mod.sources moderator.)

Better yet, why not have a weekly posting of the mod.sources archive list in
net.sources?  This was proposed before and I have heard zilch since.
'Twill much better satisfy those who don't get the mod.sources as a group
and who don't feel like periodically bothering the mod.sources moderator for
a current list of archives.  Even those who DO get mod.sources might benefit.
-- 
 -------------------------------    Disclaimer:  The views contained herein are
|       dan levy | yvel nad      |  my own and are not at all those of my em-
|         an engihacker @        |  ployer or the administrator of any computer
| at&t computer systems division |  upon which I may hack.
|        skokie, illinois        |
 --------------------------------   Path: ..!{akgua,homxb,ihnp4,ltuxa,mvuxa,
						vax135}!ttrdc!levy