From: bcr@bohr.physics.purdue.edu (Bill C. Riemers) Subject: Re: The Zen of Linux Date: 31 May 1993 23:03:12 GMT
In article <1udkei$dpk@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU> you write:
>In theory, we should have only THREE Linux groups:
> comp.os.linux.announce, for announcements, bugs fixes, FAQ postings,
> and solutions (moderated, of course).
> comp.os.linux.questions, for user and general programming questions
> and answers about Linux specifically (i.e. help on installing SLS).
> Other UNIX-related questions should go to comp.unix.questions.
> comp.os.linux.kernel, for discussion on development of system software
> (e.g., libraries) and the kernel itself. Much like certain channels
> of Linux-Activists is now.
How about discussions of ports, bugs in ports, linux distrobutions, and
programs that only work under linux (such as the dosemu)? I don't seee
why we should clutter-up the generic unix channels with linux specific
discussions. I'm sure the average HP user could careless if A2 needs
to be raw-written, or how one would go about defining two floppies to
work under the dosemu.
Also I hate the idea of a "questions" newsgroup. This implies that no discus-
sion is allowed, even though most problems do not have one&only one correct
answer. Normally I find the discussion more interesting & helpfull than the
finial solution that actually solves the specific problem. I'm afraid that if
there was a "questions" news-group it would just be a black void where people
would post questions, but nobody would ever read or answer them. Especially
since often all that you can give someone is a guess at what they should try
next rather than a definite answer.
Bill