Xref: utzoo comp.windows.x:7902 news.groups:7377
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bionet!ames!ucsd!orion.cf.uci.edu!uci-ics!paris.ics.uci.edu
From: nagel@paris.ics.uci.edu (Mark Nagel)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x,news.groups
Subject: Re: comp.andrew
Message-ID: <7363@paris.ics.uci.edu>
Date: 12 Feb 89 23:09:17 GMT
References: <0XwSL9y00Uk48LCmxg@andrew.cmu.edu>, <8901@mailgw.cc.umich.edu> <IXx7uLy00Uk4MNpXIJ@andrew.cmu.edu> <1794@cps3xx.UUCP>
Sender: news@paris.ics.uci.edu
Reply-To: nagel@paris.ics.uci.edu (Mark Nagel)
Followup-To: comp.windows.x
Organization: University of California, Irvine - Dept of ICS
Lines: 28
In-reply-to: rang@cpsin3.cps.msu.edu (Anton Rang)

In article <1794@cps3xx.UUCP>, rang@cpsin3 (Anton Rang) writes:
|I think that calling this group "comp.andrew" probably isn't a good
|idea, just because it introduces a new hierarchy (setting a bad
|precedent).  Would "comp.protocols.andrew", perhaps, be more
|appropriate?  What types of issues are being discussed on the existing
|mailing lists?

From what I've seen so far, it probably isn't just a protocol subject.
But you are correct that Andrew does not belong in a second level
position in the hierarchy.  I feel it is OK to allow a new second
level name if necessary, though.  After looking through the 40
different second-level names, it appears that the one that Andrew (and
possibly other future topics, such as the Arcadia project) could not
fit comfortably under any of them.  There needs to be a
comp.environment or comp.env second level name to root these topics.
Subject under comp.env would discuss programming environment issues,
etc.  The closest existing second level name for this is comp.cog-eng,
but I think that is sufficiently different that clumping programming
environment topics in there would confuse most people.  Therefore, I
suggest the name 'comp.env.andrew' as the proper name for this new
group should it be created.  Later, other environment discussions will
fill out the third level.  Please correct me if Andrew should not be
considered a programming environment.  If it is more of an OS
environment, then perhaps it should go under comp.os.

Mark Nagel @ UC Irvine, Dept of Info and Comp Sci
ARPA: nagel@ics.uci.edu              | Charisma doesn't have jelly in the
UUCP: {sdcsvax,ucbvax}!ucivax!nagel  | middle. -- Jim Ignatowski