Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!ardent.UUCP!jkh
From: jkh@ardent.UUCP (Jordan Hubbard)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: awm posting again
Message-ID: <8806161824.AA04821@scrod.ardent.com>
Date: 16 Jun 88 18:24:14 GMT
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 24

A few people have flamed about posting a 17 part distribution to xpert,
citing wasted resources, bandwidth and time. First, let me say that the
distribution is in 17 parts because each part is much smaller than
usual. Had I packed it normally, it would have been 9. I thought that
many smaller parts would have more chance of getting through than
large ones.

It was also suggested that the "proper" way to do things would be to
put it on expo.lcs.mit.edu. I agree, and it will be there just as soon
as I can get a connection that doesn't time out. In the mean time, it's
on decwrl.dec.com and ucbvax.berkeley.edu. However, none of these hosts
are much use to people without internet access, which seems to be
a growing percentage of xpert readers, many of which have been asking me
about awm. I agree that there should be a better way of handling this.
Perhaps an "xsource" mailing list could be set up that just consisted
of central distribution points for each region. I.E. only one copy would
get send to the U.K., one to Australia, one to the east coast, etc etc.
Naturally, these cites would have to be ones that agreed to get it to
their neighbors somehow and made that a well advertised fact.

I'm open to suggestions. The flames I've gotten seem to be rather biased
towards internet-only folks though and I'd be down on any suggestions that
didn't have some provision for those without.

						Jordan Hubbard