Xref: utzoo alt.config:437 comp.sys.cbm:1593 Path: utzoo!hoptoad!ihnp4!att!rutgers!bellcore!tness7!killer!woodsb From: woodsb@killer.UUCP (Brent L. Woods) Newsgroups: alt.config,comp.sys.cbm Subject: Re: comp.binaries.cbm and comp.sources.cbm (and maybe alt.whatever) Summary: again? Message-ID: <4804@killer.UUCP> Date: 15 Jul 88 11:24:14 GMT References: <7377@j.cc.purdue.edu> <4855@hoptoad.uucp> Reply-To: woodsb@killer.UUCP (Brent L. Woods) Organization: Artificial Realities, Inc. Lines: 43 In article <4855@hoptoad.uucp> gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) writes: >I think that users' groups and such are a more appropriate >mechanism for distributing Commodore 8-bit software. You are Oh? We seem to have no problems with distributing sources and binaries for Commodore 32 bit machines (I know whereof I speak-- see below). >welcome to set up your own network of 8-bit micros calling each >other on the phone, but please don't sent it through our network >at our expense. We will even give you all our freely available Our? Oh, my, not again. Tell me, just who is represented by your use of "our," Mr. Gilmore? >C language software for modem communications, netnews, and such, if >you can make it run on your machines. > >I would refuse any alt.binaries groups immediately. Hmm. This doesn't surprise me. > >A sources group for 6502-based software would likely be mostly >assembler language or BASIC programs, which are not likely to be useful >anyway. On the contrary. I think they would be *quite* useful to users of 6502 based machines. After all, that's the purpose of creating the groups, to serve users of those machines. Objecting because the sources and binaries would not be of immediate use to *you* strikes me as a very self-centered attitude, Mr. Gilmore. For the record, I supported the creation of the groups, even though I no longer use my C128. -- Brent Woods, Co-Moderator, comp.{sources,binaries}.amiga USENET: woodsb@killer.UUCP USNAIL: 320 Brown St., #406 / W. Lafayette, IN 47906 MABELL: +1 (317) 743-8421