Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!labrea!rutgers!bellcore!texbell!uhnix1!sugar!peter
From: peter@sugar.uu.net (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Bob is on vacation - Was: Re: Three big warnings ..
Message-ID: <3225@sugar.uu.net>
Date: 6 Jan 89 13:04:40 GMT
References: <2838@cbnews.ATT.COM> <40ababfa.87ad@apollo.COM>
Organization: Sugar Land Unix - Houston, TX
Lines: 28

In article <40ababfa.87ad@apollo.COM>, rimbold@apollo.COM (Robert Rimbold) writes:
> I think that it's too much to expect [Bob Page] to test every submission and
> make sure that all the source compiles correctly (he would have to have
> every version of every compiler, right?) and that all the animations
> execute correctly (some of them require *big* memory, right?) and that all
> the binaries execute correctly or don't do something nasty (it's awful
> hard to search for unintentional bugs).

No, I don't think it's too much. When I was running alt.sources.amiga I would
at least make sure that I could compile the program, and if I had the
facilities I'd test them. I even Manxified a couple of Lattice programs
to do this. I screwed up once, with the PCFormat3.5 stuff, because I didn't
have any 3.5 disks to check.

This is what I expect a moderator to do. If he doesn't have the resources,
he should ship a copy off to someone who does and is willing to help out.
If he's not going to test anything, you might as well have an unmoderated
group.

I know I seem awfully demanding of a volunteer, but I've been there. It's not
that much harder to do a pass over each package, if you're looking at it
anyway.

By the way, Bob. Did you repackage 'except' after I sent it to you? The one
I received for alt.sources.amiga was in three parts.
-- 
Peter "Have you hugged your wolf today" da Silva  `-_-'  Hackercorp.
...texbell!sugar!peter, or peter@sugar.uu.net      'U`