Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!mips!decwrl!csus.edu!netcom.com!netcomsv!resonex!michael
From: michael@resonex.com (Michael Bryan)
Subject: Re: time for comp.unix.bsd.386
Message-ID: <1992Aug24.074542.29794@resonex.com>
Organization: Resonex Inc., Sunnyvale CA
References: <1992Aug22.130620.15015@husc3.harvard.edu> <1992Aug23.052605.14262@uniwa.uwa.edu.au> <177pd8INNrb1@rodan.UU.NET>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 07:45:42 GMT
Lines: 35
In article <177pd8INNrb1@rodan.UU.NET> ziegast@uunet.uu.net (Eric W. Ziegast) writes:
>General BSD discussion is what this group is for, isn't it?
>The 386BSD never started out with their own group. They took over
>this one.
When comp.unix.bsd was created, the discussion started because of the
imminent releases of BSDI's BSD/386 and the Jolitz's 386BSD. From the
*beginning*, it was realized that the majority of the traffic would be
about one or the other. To say that 386BSD took over this group is
a bit of a stretch.
That's not to say that a split isn't warranted, however. At the
time of creation, some of the discussion centered around the proper
name of the new group --- should it be just "bsd", or should one or
more product-specific groups be created? In the end, it was decided
to have a generic "bsd", and split off when the traffic warranted it.
I'd say the traffic warrants it, and propose something like
the following:
comp.unix.bsd.386bsd The Jolitz port of BSD to the 386
comp.unix.bsd.bsdi BSDI's port of BSD to the 386
comp.unix.bsd.misc Other BSD topics, including 4.3, 4.4.
Time for an RFD in news.announce.newgroups?
[I know there are a lot of strong feelings about comp.unix.bsd.386bsd
vs comp.os.386bsd, and other such issues. If this is going to go
any further at this time, though, I'd say hold off until we get into
news.groups...]
--
Michael Bryan michael@resonex.com | ,_,
Milk and Cheese in '92!!! | /oo \
"What the world needs now are some true words of wisdom, | <>__|
like 'La-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la'." -- Cracker | | U|