Xref: utzoo comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d:324 comp.sys.ibm.pc:15983
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!im4u!ut-sally!nather
From: nather@ut-sally.UUCP (Ed Nather)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Source code for shar for pc's
Message-ID: <11814@ut-sally.UUCP>
Date: 27 May 88 16:08:14 GMT
References: <1555@bu-tyng.bu.edu> <3186@bsu-cs.UUCP> <239@octopus.UUCP>
Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas
Lines: 28

In article <239@octopus.UUCP>, pete@octopus.UUCP (Pete Holzmann) writes:
> In article <3186@bsu-cs.UUCP> dhesi@bsu-cs.UUCP (Rahul Dhesi) writes:
> 
> }Better still, we need comp.sources.msdos.  Why doesn't somebody propose
> }it?  The net population likes sources, so it should have no trouble
> }getting approved, and it might even encourage more source postings.
> 
> Until we see some kind of traffic in MSDOS-specific source code, I
> don't see any reason to make a whole group just for DOS sources. 
> For now, they fit very nicely into comp.sources.misc! Let's use
> the net the way it is already set up first.

Well, there was a flood of traffic in net.sources.pc, back when there was
one, almost exclusively devoted to the IBM variety of PCs.  People with
Amigas or Ataris complained (rightly) that almost all of the traffic was
for IBM PCs.  They got their own source groups as a result, which they
still retained under the Great Net Reorganization.  They have them now.
But, somehow, net.source.ibm.pc never made it through the Great Dying
in spite of (or because of?) its great popularity.

It's sad to see something so viable go extinct, or get forced into the
same group with (shudder) vms.


-- 
Ed Nather
Astronomy Dept, U of Texas @ Austin
{allegra,ihnp4}!{noao,ut-sally}!utastro!nather
nather@astro.AS.UTEXAS.EDU