Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!uunet!caen!destroyer!terminator!news From: pauls@icecreambar.css.itd.umich.edu (Paul Southworth) Subject: Re: 386bsd -- The New Newsgroup Message-ID: <1992Sep17.140349.15553@terminator.cc.umich.edu> Sender: news@terminator.cc.umich.edu (Usenet Owner) Reply-To: pauls@umich.edu Organization: University of Michigan References: <1992Sep16.234631.21365@resonex.com> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1992 14:03:49 GMT Lines: 29 Michael Bryan writes | In article <1992Sep17.002107.25707@pegasus.com> richard@pegasus.com (Richard Foulk) writes: | >> | >>to move to _six_ additional groups? One additional group will suffice | >>until the test of time proves otherwise. | >> | >God, I hope someone else is listening. Doesn't this sound like a | >sensible recommendation? | | It sounds *quite* sensible. The major proponents of creating a new group, | however, don't seem to be listening to such statements. Personally, | I will vote for any reasonably named single group, but against any | multi-group proposal. It just isn't time for such fine tuning yet... Excuse me? You're being a little hasty with that generalization. At this point, having received a fair bit of mail in response to my summary posting, I can say that at least 90% of the respondants favored only one new group, and they favored calling it comp.os.386bsd by an overwhelming margin. That being the case, while I have my own ideas about how I would like the group, the group is, after all, not for me, it's for everyone. I am not one of the primary people either asking for or offering help or information. For that matter, neither are the Jolitz's. I am trying to put some energy into new group formation because I perceive a need, and because it is what I can best offer (not being a technical guru) to the development and support of this product. Since the RFD has not gone out yet, perhaps you should wait before you start talking about how people aren't listening...