Re: Internal LAST CALL

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Fri May 10 2002 - 08:20:50 CDT


In <873cx1hmw4.fsf@erlenstar.demon.co.uk> Andrew Gierth <andrew@erlenstar.demon.co.uk> writes:

> Charles> As it now stands, defining mvgroup as an alias for newgroup
> Charles> will give a minimally compliant implementation. Obviously,
> Charles> deployment (and use) in advance of this standard could not
> Charles> happen.

>There's nothing stopping anyone from implementing mvgroup, standard or
>no standard.

Implementing mvgroup at the present time would be pointless, unless there
was clear reason to believe that the rest of the net was going to
implement it. Only a standard could provide that clear motivation. One of
the features of Netnews, as opposed to Email, is that the whole network has
to implement the same basic protocol. It is much harder to introduce some
changes incrementally and experimentally than it is in Email.

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.