Xref: utzoo news.groups:9630 comp.sources.d:3657 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!xanth!nic.MR.NET!shamash!com50!midgard!dal From: dal@midgard.Midgard.MN.ORG (Dale Schumacher) Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.sources.d Subject: Re: Posting Patches; Was Patch frequency Summary: Name suggestion, comp.patches Keywords: Patches, News Message-ID: <963@midgard.Midgard.MN.ORG> Date: 18 May 89 17:29:26 GMT References: <340@ubbs-nh.MV.COM> <479@ssbell.UUCP> Reply-To: dal@midgard.Midgard.MN.ORG (Dale Schumacher) Followup-To: news.groups Organization: The Midgard Realm, St Paul MN Lines: 16 In article <479@ssbell.UUCP> kent@ssbell.UUCP (ssbell Admin) writes: |In article <340@ubbs-nh.MV.COM> noel@ubbs-nh.MV.COM (Noel B. Del More Nashua) writes: |>And it would also be nice if their was a companion "patch" newsgroup for |>each of the newsgroups to which sources are posted, eg. |>"comp.sources.unix.p" or something similar. | |This is probably overkill in that it would (if moderated groups) require |eight different moderators as the sources groups currently stand. There is |not enough patches traffic to really justify a patch newsgroup for each |sources group. I agree that creating multiple patch groups at this time may not be the best idea, however, a small name change would allow more flexibility in future naming. If the "comp.sources.patches" group was instead called "comp.patches", it would open the door for a future "comp.patches.*" tree which would properly parallel "comp.sources.*", "comp.sys.*", etc..