Subject: Re: Patch spamming [ and a few questions ]
From: [email-masked] (Chris Green)

6 Jun 1997 21:12:37 -0700
Approved: [email-masked]
Distribution: cygnus
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Sender: [email-masked]
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.2 (32)
Original-To: David Coe <[email-masked]>
Original-Cc: [email-masked]
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
Original-Sender: [email-masked]

At 09:46 PM 6/4/97 +0100, David Coe wrote:
>Tim Iverson wrote:
>> 
>> Please stop sending large patches to the mailing list.  IMHO, this is
>> worse than junk-mail spam -- at least those are small.  If you have
>> some wonderful patch set, by all means send it to Cygnus and announce
>> it to the list.  But, please don't subject all of us to 100KB of "patch
>> of the day".
>
>It's probably best to take a pragmatic approach on this one. Last
>month's Gnu-win32 mail archive looks like about 2.5M compressed. Patch
>attachments don't make up much of that so I guess we're just a verbose
>(or troubled) bunch!
>
>Generally I find the patches (eg those from Sergey) pretty useful and
>would be sorry to see them squirreled away inaccessibly. Unless the
>Cygnus crew can provide an 'incoming' ftp facility, we're probably stuck
>with (restrained) mail attachments. Alternatively, do we have enough
>mass yet for a newsgroup? There are many, many less busy than this list!
>
>-- 
>Dr David Coe			     \=\
>58 Fairlawn Drive, East Grinstead     \=\   Tel +44 1342 326860
>West Sussex, RH19 1NT, United Kingdom  \=\  Fax +44 1342 316019

I have found the patches a good way to try and keep up with whats going on.
 This is a high bandwidth mailing list but I enjoy the format. The one
thing thats quite disturbing is we generate more bandwith talking about the
'patch spam' or the true spam than is sent to the list.  

One thing I have thought about gnu-win32 needing is perhaps a HOW-TO
archive.  Examples of how tos could include:

ssh compilation
X client & X server setup
bash 2.0 compilation

I'll try and pay more attn to things as they occur - just trying to get
everyone's opionion on it.  Each time a new beta comes out - I believe
several more people install and adore the tools.  The how-tos might augment
the faqs quite a bit.

one other thing I have been wondering - does everyone try to move all the
tools from thier default "installed as" paths to a more /usr   /bin /home
/etc /tmp 
style tradiotial *ix setup.  If most of the people that use this are
interested in that style setup - it might be nice to try and make a cdk
install shield style install that would setup that same structure and
mounting all the paths drives with binary=text.
 
Chris
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"[email-masked]" with one line of text: "help".