separating ruby-talk from comp.lang.ruby?

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by David Alan Black, May 25, 2004.

  1. 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.... ?


    David

    --
    David A. Black
     
    David Alan Black, May 25, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. David Alan Black <> wrote:
    [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 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.

    --
    Simon Strandgaard
     
    Simon Strandgaard, May 25, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "Simon Strandgaard" <> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    news:...
    > David Alan Black <> wrote:
    > [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.
     
    Robert Klemme, May 25, 2004
    #3
  4. David Alan Black

    Carlos Guest

    [David Alan Black <>, 2004-05-25 13.23 CEST]
    > 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.... ?


    The solution is to repair the mirror, not to give up.
     
    Carlos, May 25, 2004
    #4
  5. 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.... ?
    >
    >
    > 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?

    Raph
     
    Raphael Bauduin, May 25, 2004
    #5
  6. Hi --

    Simon Strandgaard <> writes:

    > David Alan Black <> wrote:
    > [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 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.


    David

    --
    David A. Black
     
    David Alan Black, May 25, 2004
    #6
  7. Carlos <> writes:

    > [David Alan Black <>, 2004-05-25 13.23 CEST]
    > > 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.... ?

    >
    > The solution is to repair the mirror, not to give up.


    Ummm, OK. Any suggestions?


    David

    --
    David A. Black
     
    David Alan Black, May 25, 2004
    #7
  8. Hi --

    "Robert Klemme" <> writes:

    > 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.


    It wouldn't be a matter of the list disappearing, just having the list
    be separate from the newsgroup. For the record, I actually really
    like(d) the mirroring. My first choice would be a working mirror, but
    I don't see how to bring that about (though I'd be glad to be proven
    wrong), and we're piling up months and months of inaccurate archives.


    David

    --
    David A. Black
     
    David Alan Black, May 25, 2004
    #8
  9. David Alan Black <> wrote:
    > Simon Strandgaard <> writes:
    > > 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.


    I had the impression Google did correct mirroring.. but I have
    never verified it.

    Is anybody aware of other services which does perfect mirroring (except NSA)?

    --
    Simon Strandgaard
     
    Simon Strandgaard, May 25, 2004
    #9
  10. Hi --

    Simon Strandgaard <> writes:

    > David Alan Black <> wrote:
    > > Simon Strandgaard <> writes:
    > > > 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.

    >
    > I had the impression Google did correct mirroring.. but I have
    > never verified it.


    No, the missing messages never seem to make it to any NNTP server or
    archive anywhere. This has been confirmed on Google, my server,
    Guy Decoux's server, and various others.

    > Is anybody aware of other services which does perfect mirroring (except NSA)?


    I don't think any service ever sees these messages :-(


    David

    --
    David A. Black
     
    David Alan Black, May 25, 2004
    #10
  11. il Tue, 25 May 2004 20:57:58 +0900, Carlos <> ha
    scritto::

    >
    >The solution is to repair the mirror, not to give up.


    I would agree.. And I think most people do. But the problem seem to
    be in the newsservers chain, and that is out of our control.
    Am I wrong?
     
    gabriele renzi, May 25, 2004
    #11
  12. David Alan Black

    Carlos Guest

    [David Alan Black <>, 2004-05-25 14.28 CEST]
    > Carlos <> writes:
    >
    > > [David Alan Black <>, 2004-05-25 13.23 CEST]
    > > > 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.... ?

    > >
    > > The solution is to repair the mirror, not to give up.

    >
    > Ummm, OK. Any suggestions?


    Not really. I don't even know what the problem is. Maybe the mantainer can
    make the logs and other information accessible, so people will be able to
    help or give suggestions.
     
    Carlos, May 25, 2004
    #12
  13. On Tuesday, May 25, 2004, 9:58:45 PM, Robert Klemme wrote:

    > 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 could not easily submit to a solution that meant I didn't see
    your contributions, Robert :)

    The python mailing list and newsgroup are united, AFAIK. Better
    investigate their solution and experience before giving up.

    Gavin
     
    Gavin Sinclair, May 25, 2004
    #13
  14. On Wednesday, May 26, 2004, 12:09:45 AM, Chris wrote:

    > Well, I'm all for separating them. It's been nothing but a pain for quite some time now.


    > Remember DRY!


    Yeah, DRY as in "don't create a situation where you need to read a
    mailing list *and* a newsgroup".

    Not that your point of view is invalid, of course.

    Cheers,
    Gavin
     
    Gavin Sinclair, May 25, 2004
    #14
  15. David Alan Black <> wrote:
    [...]

    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...

    Martin
     
    Martin Pirker, May 25, 2004
    #15
  16. David Alan Black

    Phil Tomson Guest

    In article <>,
    David Alan Black <> wrote:
    >
    >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.

    Phil
     
    Phil Tomson, May 25, 2004
    #16
  17. "David Alan Black" <> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    news:...
    > Hi --
    >
    > "Robert Klemme" <> writes:
    >
    > > 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.

    >
    > It wouldn't be a matter of the list disappearing, just having the list
    > be separate from the newsgroup.


    I know that you didn't propose that. Maybe I wasn't clear enough... I
    was just trying to say that, *if* we want only one place, then I don't
    mind if it's *not* the mailing list. IOW: my preference is news. :))

    > For the record, I actually really
    > like(d) the mirroring. My first choice would be a working mirror, but


    Definitely!

    > I don't see how to bring that about (though I'd be glad to be proven
    > wrong), and we're piling up months and months of inaccurate archives.


    I liked the suggestion to make logs public so people can help out / voice
    their ideas about possible reasons.

    Kind regards

    robert
     
    Robert Klemme, May 25, 2004
    #17
  18. "Gavin Sinclair" <> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    news:...
    > On Tuesday, May 25, 2004, 9:58:45 PM, Robert Klemme wrote:
    >
    > > 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 could not easily submit to a solution that meant I didn't see
    > your contributions, Robert :)


    Oh, thanks a lot! Neither would I like to miss your postings.

    > The python mailing list and newsgroup are united, AFAIK. Better
    > investigate their solution and experience before giving up.


    Maybe they just use another NNTP host for distribution...

    Kind regards

    robert
     
    Robert Klemme, May 25, 2004
    #18
  19. "Martin Pirker" <-graz.ac.at> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    news:40b3655f$0$11742$...
    > David Alan Black <> wrote:
    > [...]
    >
    > 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.

    Regards

    robert
     
    Robert Klemme, May 25, 2004
    #19
  20. Hi --

    On Wed, 26 May 2004, Phil Tomson wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > David Alan Black <> wrote:
    > >
    > >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.

    > 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 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.


    David

    --
    David A. Black
     
    David A. Black, May 25, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.

Share This Page