Given that the gateway between ruby-talk and comp.lang.ruby is still
not working consistently, I’m wondering whether it’s time to turn off
the gateway entirely and separate the two groups. It seems to me that
partial mirroring is worse than no mirroring.
Dennis (the maintainer) has tried to analyze and fix the problem, but
it appears to be downstream from his system somewhere. I guess it’s
possible to investigate further, but at this point it may be pretty
hard, and meanwhile the unofficial split between the list and the
newsgroup continues to grow. I think it might be better to make it
official.
I don’t know exactly how such a decision would be made, but I figured
the first step would be to see what people think of such a move (not
the idea of mirroring per se, but the idea of turning off mirroring in
light of the fact that it doesn’t work). So… ?
I don’t know exactly how such a decision would be made, but I figured
the first step would be to see what people think of such a move (not
the idea of mirroring per se, but the idea of turning off mirroring in
light of the fact that it doesn’t work). So… ?
I used the newsgroup, but it was a terrible mess, replies wasn’t mirrored
correct… etc. In paticular posts from you didn’t show up on the newsgroup.
Some time ago I switched to instead using the mailing list, and its much
better.
I wonder how google does it?
If the news2mail cannot work in all cases, then don’t.
I don’t like the inconsistency introduced by partially working systems.
A consequence would be that the Ruby socierty are divided in two parts.
Given that the gateway between ruby-talk and comp.lang.ruby is still
not working consistently, I’m wondering whether it’s time to turn off
the gateway entirely and separate the two groups. It seems to me that
partial mirroring is worse than no mirroring.
Dennis (the maintainer) has tried to analyze and fix the problem, but
it appears to be downstream from his system somewhere. I guess it’s
possible to investigate further, but at this point it may be pretty
hard, and meanwhile the unofficial split between the list and the
newsgroup continues to grow. I think it might be better to make it
official.
I don’t know exactly how such a decision would be made, but I figured
the first step would be to see what people think of such a move (not
the idea of mirroring per se, but the idea of turning off mirroring in
light of the fact that it doesn’t work). So… ?
The solution is to repair the mirror, not to give up.
Given that the gateway between ruby-talk and comp.lang.ruby is still
not working consistently, I’m wondering whether it’s time to turn off
the gateway entirely and separate the two groups. It seems to me that
partial mirroring is worse than no mirroring.
Dennis (the maintainer) has tried to analyze and fix the problem, but
it appears to be downstream from his system somewhere. I guess it’s
possible to investigate further, but at this point it may be pretty
hard, and meanwhile the unofficial split between the list and the
newsgroup continues to grow. I think it might be better to make it
official.
I don’t know exactly how such a decision would be made, but I figured
the first step would be to see what people think of such a move (not
the idea of mirroring per se, but the idea of turning off mirroring in
light of the fact that it doesn’t work). So… ?
David
I would be more of the opinion to fix the problem. Is there a precise description of the problem
and of what has been tried to solve it? (Maybe it was posted on the ml and didn’t make it to c.l.r?
I would find it bad to separate both. I’m reading the newsgroup, and find it annoying to miss some posts,
but I would vote for trying to solve the problem rather than scratch the link between both.
So, rather than just voice my opinion, should I contact Dennis (how?) to propose my help? How can I help?
I don’t know exactly how such a decision would be made, but I figured
the first step would be to see what people think of such a move (not
the idea of mirroring per se, but the idea of turning off mirroring in
light of the fact that it doesn’t work). So… ?
Personally, I think there is already too much fragmentation in Ruby-land.
Separating ruby-talk from comp.lang.ruby would only make it worse. I
would have to keep up with two different forums if they are separated.
To find information people would have to do a search at both groups.google.com and on www.ruby-talk.org.
I have always preferred reading comp.lang.ruby over subscribing to
ruby-talk (too much mail). I really hope we can keep the two connected.
I think mirroring the newsgroup and the mailing list is great. Just
wonderful. But given that the mirroring isn’t working very well, one of
the following should be done:
Fix the current setup. Obviously, this has been tried, so I’m not
holding out much hope on this one.
Pull the plug on the current setup and try some other mail-news
gateway software. (I haven’t looked, but there’s probably tons of them
floating around the net.)
So, if (1) isn’t going to work for us, perhaps it would be best to make
the split offcial until we[1] can fix it.
[1] I mean, of course, anybody but me. I don’t have a suitable machine
available, otherwise I might give it a shot.
Given that the gateway between ruby-talk and comp.lang.ruby is still
not working consistently, I’m wondering whether it’s time to turn off
the gateway entirely and separate the two groups. It seems to me that
partial mirroring is worse than no mirroring.
Dennis (the maintainer) has tried to analyze and fix the problem, but
it appears to be downstream from his system somewhere. I guess it’s
possible to investigate further, but at this point it may be pretty
hard, and meanwhile the unofficial split between the list and the
newsgroup continues to grow. I think it might be better to make it
official.
I don’t know exactly how such a decision would be made, but I figured
the first step would be to see what people think of such a move (not
the idea of mirroring per se, but the idea of turning off mirroring in
light of the fact that it doesn’t work). So… ?
Some people like myself don’t have the time or inclination to be
subscribed to YAHVML (yet another high-volume mailing list), but would
like to participate and/or lurk on a semiregular basis. The newsgroup,
however imperfect, is perfect for this. A mailing list, archives or no,
is not. So my vote is keep the newsgroup!
David Alan Black wrote:
···
Hi –
Given that the gateway between ruby-talk and comp.lang.ruby is still
not working consistently, I’m wondering whether it’s time to turn off
the gateway entirely and separate the two groups. It seems to me that
partial mirroring is worse than no mirroring.
Dennis (the maintainer) has tried to analyze and fix the problem, but
it appears to be downstream from his system somewhere. I guess it’s
possible to investigate further, but at this point it may be pretty
hard, and meanwhile the unofficial split between the list and the
newsgroup continues to grow. I think it might be better to make it
official.
I don’t know exactly how such a decision would be made, but I figured
the first step would be to see what people think of such a move (not
the idea of mirroring per se, but the idea of turning off mirroring in
light of the fact that it doesn’t work). So… ?
“Simon Strandgaard” neoneye@adslhome.dk schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:20040525133110.2b39b3cc.neoneye@adslhome.dk…
[snip]
I don’t know exactly how such a decision would be made, but I figured
the first step would be to see what people think of such a move (not
the idea of mirroring per se, but the idea of turning off mirroring in
light of the fact that it doesn’t work). So… ?
I agree that it’s a nuisance. Maybe switching off the gateway is the best
we can do, but…
An alternative that comes to mind would be to automatically put something
into the header to let people know from which side the post originated to
make them aware that replies are more likely to originate on one or the
other side. I’m aware that this won’t fix anything and it won’t prevent
anybody loosing thread answers, but might be a useful hint.
Personally I could very well live with switching the mailing list off, but
then people have different preferences and I don’t really expect the
mailing list to disappear.
I used the newsgroup, but it was a terrible mess, replies wasn’t
mirrored
correct… etc. In paticular posts from you didn’t show up on the
newsgroup.
Some time ago I switched to instead using the mailing list, and its much
better.
I wonder how google does it?
If the news2mail cannot work in all cases, then don’t.
I don’t like the inconsistency introduced by partially working systems.
Me, too.
A consequence would be that the Ruby socierty are divided in two parts.
That is exactly the major issue that keeps me from agreeing
unconditionally to the split suggestion. OTOH there is already news,
mailing list and IRC. I’d certainly regret losing the input of those
people on the other side. sigh
Kind regards
robert
PS: David, thanks for bringing this up again and trying to find a
solution.
Given that the gateway between ruby-talk and comp.lang.ruby is still
not working consistently, I’m wondering whether it’s time to turn off
the gateway entirely and separate the two groups. It seems to me that
partial mirroring is worse than no mirroring.
Dennis (the maintainer) has tried to analyze and fix the problem, but
it appears to be downstream from his system somewhere. I guess it’s
possible to investigate further, but at this point it may be pretty
hard, and meanwhile the unofficial split between the list and the
newsgroup continues to grow. I think it might be better to make it
official.
I don’t know exactly how such a decision would be made, but I figured
the first step would be to see what people think of such a move (not
the idea of mirroring per se, but the idea of turning off mirroring in
light of the fact that it doesn’t work). So… ?
The solution is to repair the mirror, not to give up.
I don’t know exactly how such a decision would be made, but I figured
the first step would be to see what people think of such a move (not
the idea of mirroring per se, but the idea of turning off mirroring in
light of the fact that it doesn’t work). So… ?
I used the newsgroup, but it was a terrible mess, replies wasn’t mirrored
correct… etc. In paticular posts from you didn’t show up on the newsgroup.
Some time ago I switched to instead using the mailing list, and its much
better.
If your posts get through to the newsgroup. For me it doesn’t work.
I have to read the mailing list (to make sure I see everything), and
then fire up a newsreader to actually reply to anything (unless I’m
replying to something that never made it to the newsgroup…).
I wonder how google does it?
It doesn’t – I mean, many of the ruby-talk posts never make it to
Google. That’s one way I became aware of the problem.
“Martin Pirker” crf@sbox.tu-graz.ac.at schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:40b3655f$0$11742$3b214f66@aconews.univie.ac.at…
[…]
I’m counting 39404 articles since 20030101 from c.l.r in my local
archive
Is there somewhere a full ml archive for download?
(and a good idea to diff them)?
Maybe a newsserver with open access but only one group (c.l.o.) might
be a good idea to ppl like me who prefer news…
That sounds like a good idea. If we can set this up on the gateway host,
that’d be good. That of course depends on the hardware, settings and
access regulations of that machine.
I have always preferred reading comp.lang.ruby over subscribing to
ruby-talk (too much mail). I really hope we can keep the two connected.
One other important thing to keep in mind is that some of us are forced
to use ruby-talk because we don’t have access to a news server (other
than through google, which is dog slow). Even though I prefer NNTP, I
can’t use it at work.
I don’t know exactly how such a decision would be made, but I figured
the first step would be to see what people think of such a move (not
the idea of mirroring per se, but the idea of turning off mirroring in
light of the fact that it doesn’t work). So… ?
Personally, I think there is already too much fragmentation in Ruby-land.
Separating ruby-talk from comp.lang.ruby would only make it worse. I
would have to keep up with two different forums if they are separated.
That’s already the case, though; if you’re not reading ruby-talk,
you’re not seeing all of what’s sent to it.
I have always preferred reading comp.lang.ruby over subscribing to
ruby-talk (too much mail). I really hope we can keep the two connected.
The problem is… they’re not. That’s what I mean about its not being
about the idea of mirroring per se. In theory I’m all for it, but
it’s a question of how many months/years/whatever we want to go on
with the non-working mirror.
Personally, I think there is already too much fragmentation in Ruby-land.
Agreed, but only in terms of the various websites for Ruby resources
(sometimes I can’t remember all of the them: ruby-doc.org, ruby-lang.org, whyruby, rubyforge, rubygarden, rubycentral, etc etc).
In terms of mailing list, no. Other languages have many separate
lists/newsgroups too.
Python also has comp.lang.python ↔ python-list gateway going on, and
it has way more separate lists (python-sig, python-win32,
python-bugs-list, python-announce, etc).
Perl doesn’t even mirror comp.lang.perl and its mailing lists hosted
at @perl.org. Also there are several lists at Activestate.
···
Separating ruby-talk from comp.lang.ruby would only make it worse. I
would have to keep up with two different forums if they are separated.
To find information people would have to do a search at both groups.google.com and on www.ruby-talk.org.
I have always preferred reading comp.lang.ruby over subscribing to
ruby-talk (too much mail). I really hope we can keep the two connected.
The problem with semiregular lurkers is that they don’t notice
Professor Black’s repeated reminders that the newsgroup is not going
anywhere
Cheers,
Gavin
···
On Friday, May 28, 2004, 10:59:07 PM, Hans wrote:
Some people like myself don’t have the time or inclination to be
subscribed to YAHVML (yet another high-volume mailing list), but would
like to participate and/or lurk on a semiregular basis. The newsgroup,
however imperfect, is perfect for this. A mailing list, archives or no,
is not. So my vote is keep the newsgroup!
