Xref: utzoo comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d:877 comp.sources.wanted:4909 comp.sources.d:2629 Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!uwmcsd1!nic.MR.NET!umn-cs!bungia!datapg!sewilco From: sewilco@datapg.MN.ORG (Scot E Wilcoxon) Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d,comp.sources.wanted,comp.sources.d Subject: Re: Call for discussion: comp.sources.archives Message-ID: <1635@datapg.MN.ORG> Date: 30 Aug 88 18:30:51 GMT References: <222@pigs.UUCP> <6031@orstcs.CS.ORST.EDU> <236@pigs.UUCP> <478@c10sd1.StPaul.NCR <362@pigs.UUCP> <6146@dasys1.UUCP> Reply-To: sewilco@datapg.MN.ORG (Scot E Wilcoxon) Followup-To: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d Organization: Data Progress, Minneapolis, MN Lines: 34 In article <6146@dasys1.UUCP> tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes: >Would archive sites be tempted to post their entire file directory listings, >with comments, to the group? Would it be too much to carry if they did? If the list is 62K (500 files), a full list is no problem. For a large archive site, the question is relevant to this discussion. The UUNET archive list is 225K (1100 files) with no comments, with comments it should be twice its present size (it presently is in `ls -l` format). >Should postings be limited >to "I archive these newsgroups and RFCs"? Specialties might be newsgroups, hardware or software types, or other concepts (graphics, text, linear programming, etc). This is a good idea, so one has an idea of which archive sites might have something. >Will users post numerous requests for specific files ("has anyone got this" etc)? They're already posting (see comp.sources.wanted). Instead of posting, most will find an archive site and inquire there. The "netlib" server has a "find" command which can be used to search for searching a directory for strings. The "decwrl" server does not have such a capability (yet). I don't know of any string searching in `ftp`... >Should the group be moderated for the foregoing reasons? Managers of archives should be aware enough of the nets to restrain themselves in direct proportion to the size of their archive or posting. If a standard format is adopted for indexes, I'd prefer no centralized handling. There will be some "wanted" postings, but in general they should be reduced netwide by the ability to find archive sites (maybe I'll start reading c.s.wanted again when the volume drops :-). -- Scot E. Wilcoxon sewilco@DataPg.MN.ORG {amdahl|hpda}!bungia!datapg!sewilco Data Progress UNIX masts & rigging +1 612-825-2607 uunet!datapg!sewilco