Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!amdahl!paf From: paf@uts.amdahl.com (Paul A. Fronberg) Newsgroups: comp.sources.d Subject: Patch frequency Keywords: Patches, News Message-ID: Date: 15 May 89 15:12:45 GMT Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA Lines: 29 In regards to patch frequency, what about News 2.11 or Pearl. There are now 17 patches for 2.11 and I forget how many came out originally for pearl. Patch, itself, is up to 8. There are two major problems that I see with comp.sources/comp.misc and official patches. One is that the patches may not be posted in a commonly read newsgroup. As an example, the sources for 2.11 were posted in mod.sources (comp.sources?) and the official patches appear in news.software.b. It was by pure accident that I even saw the news patches and found where to look for them. This is probably the extreme case, but I am sure that other cases may be found (elm). I claim that all offical patches should be issued through the moderated source group that the program was originally posted. This would allow easier administration of fixes and put them in a known group. The second problem is that with certain critical programs (news, patch) it probably makes sense, at some point, to do a repost with all the patches applied. With news 2.11, I found that I had to upgrade the patch program to apply som patches. Also, I had to get a patch that I'd missed due to system problems and had one arrive slightly mangled. Perhaps certain programs should be periodically posted once a quarter or once a year just to ensure that the community has up to date versions. News and patch would be prime canidates. As an aside, I wonder what the average net patch level for news is, or the patch program? Are there still sites using 2.10.* ?