Mail Archives: djgpp/1995/10/01/19:59:56
Hello,
Yikes! I think it was my idea that set this whole thing off and now I seem
to have stirred up a little contretemps which was the last thing I wanted.
The newsgroup is definitely the place for all general Ada stuff and gnat
news of general interest. I thought of a mailing list for gnat on Solaris
as I know quite a bit about that particular subject especially
self-inflicted installation difficulties and would help others where I
could.
I think there is a type of message which clutters newsgroups which is fine
on more specific mailing lists. For example Unix shell scripts which set
up the correct environment for a particular version of GNAT on a
particular OS (e.g. Solaris) will be of possible interest to people in the
same situation or possibly other Unix users but are a waste of time for a
WindowsNT user I would think.
That is all I was thinking of, and I note that we seem to agree on this
minimum. More general messages than this should at least be copied to CLA,
but ideally should go here only to ensure the maximum chance of Ada95 and
GNAT continuing to interest more and more people which is what we're
trying to do after all.
I can see now that Prof Dewar is rightly a little irritated by the idea
that there might a mailing list 'thread' with valuable info on it which
didn't make it to cla, missed some potental readers and therefore didn't
reach out and grab some more audience. I promise I am only thinking of
messages which, on the contrary, add little to the newsgroup. So I don't
think that scenario should occur. If it does then a gentle suggestion to
the mail author of taking the discussion to the newsgroup would be in
order. I would write such a note myself if I saw things moving away from
the focus of the mailing list. There is a very fine line between trying to
minimize noise and too much splintering off into tiny little factions. I
myself read all news I see relating to GNAT e.g. the exciting developments
on SGI platforms even though I have never even seen an SGI machine in my
life.
I hope we can reach agreement on how to strike the right balance in this
debate without any feelings of resentment. After all, this whole issue is
based on enthusiasm for Ada and GNAT!
Greetings to all from the London, England branch of the Ada fan club!
Chris
In article <dewar DOT 812468722 AT schonberg>, dewar AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu (Robert Dewar) wrote:
> I am a little surprised by Mike's announcement of the GNAT mailing list.
> I would see it as a step backwards to go from an openly accessible
> news group discussion mode for GNAT related matters to a closed
> mailing list. What do I mean by closed here? I mean that people browsing
> around for Ada related stuff won't see the traffic on that mailing list.
> It seems desirable to me that people browsing CLA see the discussion
> of GNAT and know that they can get hold of a free compiler. It seems
> a step backwards to hide this discussion.
>
> We have several times discussed (in this newsgroup and elsewhere) the
> idea of making a subgroup for GNAT discussions, and that is ultimately
> a good idea, but every time we discussed that in the past the consensus
> was that the volume was not high enough to warrant this separation.
>
> It would be a shame if all people browsing CLA see is lanuage war
> stuff, and mandate moans. I think that technical discussion of GNAT
> related issues is one useful component of CLA right now.
>
> The genesis of the idea that Mike is following up was the suggestion
> of setting up a mailing list specifically for Solaris users of GNAT to
> discuss technical issues of installation and use related to Solaris. That
> seems like a good idea, since occasionally we do see messages about
> specific installation which would be better handled by a more focused
> mailing list.
> When this more restricted idea was discussed earlier, I noted to Mike
> that ACT would definitely have people on the list and be glad to
> participate.
>
> However, as far as the more general list goes, I really prefer to see
> the general discussions continue on CLA. For example, if someone does
> something in Ada they don't understand and want help, I would rather
> they go to CLA than Mike's mailing list, so that a wider audience
> sees the resulting discussion. Sure if there is a GNAT bug involved,
> it should go to report AT gnat DOT com, but many of the "GNAT related"
> discussions are just discussions of Ada things, and should reach
> a wide audience (consider for example, the current discussion of
> placement of primitive operations). I would think it a shame if
> people think that because they are using GNAT, their Ada questions
> should be buried in the mailing list.
>
> Consequently, at least speaking for me, I will continue to read CLA
> and respond to GNAT-related stuff there where appropriate, but I don't
> plan to join Mike's mailing list, and I hope that anyone mailing stuff
> to that mailing list will consider posting to CLA as well if it is of
> general interest.
>
> I still think it would be useful to persue the original idea of highly
> focussed (system specific) mailing lists on the use and installation
> of GNAT. Installation is an area where a lot of people need hand holding
> (95% at least of the installation questions we get at report AT gnat DOT com
> are the result of not being able to follow the instructions carefully!)
> and also an area where the resulting messages are definitely NOT of
> general Ada interest.
>
> So I hope someone persues the original idea here!
- Raw text -