Very Computer

by **Ben C** » Tue, 21 Jul 1992 00:25:42

I just wanted to let the readership of comp.os.linux know that

>>If you are going to do anything then please put the heirarchy under comp.os
>>where it logically belongs.
>Actually, I was going to suggest pulling comp.os.{minix,linux,coherent} into
>the comp.unix world, if that's OK with the readership of those groups. That's
>because Unix isn't an operating system: it's a family of operating systems
>with a common core API... and as far as I'm concerned MINIX, LINUX, and
>Coherent *are* Unix.
>--
> `-_-'
> Have you hugged your wolf today? 'U`
>Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX +1 713 568 0480/1032

--
Ben Cox

by **Rick Emers** » Wed, 22 Jul 1992 02:06:11

> I just wanted to let the readership of comp.os.linux know that

Thanks for passing this on.

> >>If you are going to do anything then please put the heirarchy under comp.os
> >>where it logically belongs.

> >Actually, I was going to suggest pulling comp.os.{minix,linux,coherent} into
> >the comp.unix world, if that's OK with the readership of those groups. That'
> >because Unix isn't an operating system: it's a family of operating systems
> >with a common core API... and as far as I'm concerned MINIX, LINUX, and
> >Coherent *are* Unix.
> >--
> > `-_-'
> > Have you hugged your wolf today? 'U`

> >Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX +1 713 568 0480/1032

Um, where does Mr. da Silva get his authority to even propose to move c.o.l?
Before anyone proposes this, it would be wise to leave an RFD on the
newsgroup(s) in question.

This seems to me to be a matter of moving mail from group A to group B
because the titles look pretty together. Without regard for the amount of
work several hundred (thousand?) people will have to do to follow the moving
newsgroup.

The idea of splitting c.o.l doesn't seem to have taken this group by storm;
this idea (c.u.l) may well go over about as well as a * crutch in an
orthopaedics ward...

Rick

by **Ben C** » Wed, 22 Jul 1992 04:31:23

Quote:>If you are going to do anything then please put the heirarchy under comp.os
>where it logically belongs.

[I forwarded this post over to comp.os.linux --bc]

Quote:>Actually, I was going to suggest pulling comp.os.{minix,linux,coherent} into
>the comp.unix world, if that's OK with the readership of those groups. That'
>because Unix isn't an operating system: it's a family of operating systems
>with a common core API... and as far as I'm concerned MINIX, LINUX, and
>Coherent *are* Unix.

Quote:>Um, where does Mr. da Silva get his authority to even propose to move c.o.l?
>Before anyone proposes this, it would be wise to leave an RFD on the
>newsgroup(s) in question.

Hang on a minute -- Peter wasn't saying he was GOING to do that, but
that he was THINKING about SUGGESTING that.

This was in a thread (started by Chip Salzenberg) about rearranging
some of the comp.unix.* groups, and Peter seemed to me to be just
giving his $0.02. (Am I right on that?)

Presumably, nobody would want to simply tack comp.os.linux onto the
comp.unix.* RFD without checking with c.o.l first, right? Hmm? :)

Followups have been redirected to news.groups.

--
Ben Cox

by **Peter da Sil** » Wed, 22 Jul 1992 10:05:31

It appears I've caused some distress with a comment I made on news.groups.
Just to avoid further flames, let me repeat it emphasising one particular
phrase that seems to have been underemphasised in the original:

Quote:>>Actually, I was going to suggest pulling comp.os.{minix,linux,coherent} into
>>the comp.unix world, IF THAT'S OK WITH THE READERSHIP OF THOSE GROUPS. That'

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Quote:>>because Unix isn't an operating system: it's a family of operating systems
>>with a common core API... and as far as I'm concerned MINIX, LINUX, and
>>Coherent *are* Unix.

Of course I wouldn't take any such proposal to the RFD stage without asking
the people involved first. That means discussion in comp.os.linux, .minix,
and .coherent.
--
`-_-'
Have you hugged your wolf today? 'U`

Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX +1 713 568 0480/1032

by **Rick Emers** » Thu, 23 Jul 1992 06:29:08

Quote:
> It appears I've caused some distress with a comment I made on news.groups.
> Just to avoid further flames, let me repeat it emphasising one particular
> phrase that seems to have been underemphasised in the original:

> >>Actually, I was going to suggest pulling comp.os.{minix,linux,coherent} int
> >>the comp.unix world, IF THAT'S OK WITH THE READERSHIP OF THOSE GROUPS. That
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >>because Unix isn't an operating system: it's a family of operating systems
> >>with a common core API... and as far as I'm concerned MINIX, LINUX, and
> >>Coherent *are* Unix.

As one who took some exception to the proposal, I consider it bad form to
even raise the topic in news.groups before raising it here (and on the other
groups, for that matter, but I don't read them so how can I comment on
that?). In one area there are readers who're debating adding three new
flavors of unix to comp.unix.xxx while at least this newgroup hasn't even
decided about how (or *if) comp.os.linux should be partitioned.

Quote:> Of course I wouldn't take any such proposal to the RFD stage without asking
> the people involved first. That means discussion in comp.os.linux, .minix,
> and .coherent.

Um, rather late in doing that, aren't you?

What is gained by moving to comp.unix.linux? I suppose there's a certain
amount of cachet in replacing .os. with .unix. On the down side, the
readership has to adjust to a new group while monitoring the old group.

Alt.bbs.waffle voted to move to comp.bbs.waffle and, despite the move to the
more "respectable" comp.xxx, alt.bbs.waffle still carries some traffic.
Xxx.bbs.waffle on its best day carries perhaps 1/4 of the traffic here and
the move has caused problems.

I don't see the justification for moving this newsgroup.

Rick

by **Ben Lippo** » Thu, 23 Jul 1992 16:47:49

>Alt.bbs.waffle voted to move to comp.bbs.waffle and, despite the move to the
>more "respectable" comp.xxx, alt.bbs.waffle still carries some traffic.
>Xxx.bbs.waffle on its best day carries perhaps 1/4 of the traffic here and
>the move has caused problems.

To me it seemed that the move from alt.os.linux to comp.os.linux went rarther
smooth. After about a month the posts to alt.os.linux completely stopped.

Quote:>I don't see the justification for moving this newsgroup.

To me it really doesn't matter. I would just say: go with the majority.
If the minix and coherent and other groups want to move, just follow them.

Ben Lippolt.

by **Kolja Kaehl** » Fri, 24 Jul 1992 07:52:25

[stuff deleted]

> To me it really doesn't matter. I would just say: go with the majority.
> If the minix and coherent and other groups want to move, just follow them.

I agree. BTW: if people considered linux to be 'mainly unix', as c.u.l
suggests, couldn't this possibly reduce the number of postings with questions
about general unix behaviour (like the famous 'rm ./-I'-thread) in c.o.l ?

Kolja
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by **Kevin Cummin** » Thu, 23 Jul 1992 06:21:22

> I just wanted to let the readership of comp.os.linux know that

> >>If you are going to do anything then please put the heirarchy under comp.os
> >>where it logically belongs.

> >Actually, I was going to suggest pulling comp.os.{minix,linux,coherent} into
> >the comp.unix world, if that's OK with the readership of those groups. That's
> >because Unix isn't an operating system: it's a family of operating systems
> >with a common core API... and as far as I'm concerned MINIX, LINUX, and
> >Coherent *are* Unix.

Wow, sounds to me like UNIX isn't an OS? Maybe we should pull all of the
.unix. groups back into comp.os where THEY belong? B^)
(Why do I feel like there is something WRONG with that?)

Followups to news.groups.

--
=================================================================
Kevin J. Cummings PrimeService
20 Briarwood Road A Computervision Company
Framingham, Mass. 500 Old Connecticut Path
Framingham, Mass.

Std. Disclaimer: "Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration,
I've come to the conclusion that your new
defense system SUCKS..." -- War Games
=================================================================

by **Chip Salzenbe** » Sat, 25 Jul 1992 21:50:24

I don't know if anyone realizes this, but I am _not_ going to include
any comp.os.* proposals in this reorganization. Nattering about the
relevance of the "comp.unix" hierarchy misses the point: the hierarchy
is in use, and is useful. There are real problems to be fixed within
it, though, and _that_ is what I'm working on.
--

"Do Rush place weird subliminal backmasked messages in their songs to
compel unwilling geeks to commit evil .sig atrocities?" -- Dean Engelhardt

by **Rick Emers** » Sun, 26 Jul 1992 00:41:28

> I don't know if anyone realizes this, but I am _not_ going to include
> any comp.os.* proposals in this reorganization. Nattering about the
> relevance of the "comp.unix" hierarchy misses the point: the hierarchy
> is in use, and is useful. There are real problems to be fixed within
> it, though, and _that_ is what I'm working on.

Huh? I see the words but the message eludes me.

Rick

by **Chip Salzenbe** » Wed, 29 Jul 1992 04:29:03

>> I don't know if anyone realizes this, but I am _not_ going to include
>> any comp.os.* proposals in this reorganization.

>Huh? I see the words but the message eludes me.

Some people have proposed moving Linux, Minix, etc. into comp.unix.*.
I'm running the reorg of comp.unix.*, and I won't support such a move.

by **william E Davids** » Wed, 29 Jul 1992 23:35:46

| Some people have proposed moving Linux, Minix, etc. into comp.unix.*.
| I'm running the reorg of comp.unix.*, and I won't support such a move.

It would actually make more sense to move unix under comp.os rather
than have a hierarchy of its own. I realize this is for hysterical
reasons (oops, historical reasons, freudian slip no doubt), but logic
would indicate that this is a reasonable thing to do.

Moving any os groups not based on AT&T code into comp.unix is probably
a bad idea.
--
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
It never ceases to amaze me that otherwise rational people, able to
understand calculus, compound interest, and the income tax form, can
continue to believe that poker is a game of chance.

by **Rick Emers** » Sat, 01 Aug 1992 23:42:09

> >> I don't know if anyone realizes this, but I am _not_ going to include
> >> any comp.os.* proposals in this reorganization.

> >Huh? I see the words but the message eludes me.

> Some people have proposed moving Linux, Minix, etc. into comp.unix.*.
> I'm running the reorg of comp.unix.*, and I won't support such a move.

Oh. That's what I thought you were saying. I agree that moving to
comp.unix.foo is best described as an excercise in re-arranging deck chairs
(although *not* on a sinking ship <g>).

Rick

Very Computer

RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization

RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization

RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization

RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization

RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization

RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization

RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization

RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization

RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization

RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization

RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization

RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization

RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization

RFD: comp.unix.* reorganization