> Sounds good.  Also, is there a chance that you could slightly modify the
>   converter tool so that email addresses could be mangled a bit so that
> spam-bots don't come through and harvest all of the addresses?
>

Yes.

Is    "brad[AT]sankaty{DOT}dot{DOT}com" mangled enough ?

Another way is to simply removed all email adresses.

Marc

Marc wrote:
>>Sounds good.  Also, is there a chance that you could slightly modify the
>>  converter tool so that email addresses could be mangled a bit so that
>>spam-bots don't come through and harvest all of the addresses?
>>
> 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> Is    "brad[AT]sankaty{DOT}dot{DOT}com" mangled enough ?

That should be fine.  I already did a bit of mangling, but others haven't.

> Another way is to simply removed all email adresses.

I think leaving them is probably better, because you can then track the person down if you want to ask them a question about the post.  Make sense?


Thanks for this effort !!

BA

It's not an official project yet.  At the very least, I have to reformat the source code to the GNU style ;-).  I do plan on submitting it when it becomes stable.

David

Norbert Nemec wrote:

> What about D.gnu? Most appropriate place might be gnu.gdc, but: is the gdc a
> official GNU project or does it just use the gcc as backend?
> 
> It would be reasonable to think about making it an official GNU project. GNU
> has a few conditions for projects that are to become part of GNU, but I
> believe it would be the right step. Up to the decision of David, of course.
> 
> The considerations about the naming of the newsgroup should probably be
> stalled until this is cleared up.
> 
> 
> 
> Walter wrote:
> 
> 
>>It turns out, that the first step in getting the newsgroups here
>>propagated is they have to be renamed. "D" just wasn't unique enough <g>.
>>But renaming the D newsgroup will screw up a lot of things. So, two new
>>newsgroups have been created:
>>
>>digitalmars.D
>>digitalmars.D.bugs
>>
>>In digitalmars.D.bugs should go bug reports and followups to them. Please
>>don't put in here questions about D, or proposed new features, etc. It
>>should be bug reports only, which will make it much easier for people to
>>peruse to see if they are experiencing a reported bug or not.
>>
>>In digitalmars.D should go everything else about D that formerly went into
>>the D newsgroup.
>>
>>For ongoing existing threads in the D newsgroup, continue posting in D but
>>please just add digitalmars.D to the newsgroup list it will be posted to.
>>
>>The old D newsgroup will remain. If someone is willing to write some
>>software that would convert it to a linked set of 40,000 html pages <g>
>>that would be cool. Anyone up for that? Doing that would mean we can a)
>>retire the group and b) it will be indexed by Google.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>-Walter
> 
> 

How about trying to fade out the use of the old group as fast as possible? How about sending an automatic daily message to the old list telling people no to post any new threads there and move to the new list instead.



Walter wrote:

> It turns out, that the first step in getting the newsgroups here propagated is they have to be renamed. "D" just wasn't unique enough <g>. But renaming the D newsgroup will screw up a lot of things. So, two new newsgroups have been created:
> 
> digitalmars.D
> digitalmars.D.bugs
> 
> In digitalmars.D.bugs should go bug reports and followups to them. Please don't put in here questions about D, or proposed new features, etc. It should be bug reports only, which will make it much easier for people to peruse to see if they are experiencing a reported bug or not.
> 
> In digitalmars.D should go everything else about D that formerly went into the D newsgroup.
> 
> For ongoing existing threads in the D newsgroup, continue posting in D but please just add digitalmars.D to the newsgroup list it will be posted to.
> 
> The old D newsgroup will remain. If someone is willing to write some software that would convert it to a linked set of 40,000 html pages <g> that would be cool. Anyone up for that? Doing that would mean we can a) retire the group and b) it will be indexed by Google.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Walter

Norbert Nemec wrote:

>How about trying to fade out the use of the old group as fast as possible?
>How about sending an automatic daily message to the old list telling people
>no to post any new threads there and move to the new list instead.
>  
>
Or just banning write access (eventually).  People can reply to the newsgroup by d.d

-- 
-Anderson: http://badmama.com.au/~anderson/

Norbert Nemec wrote:
> How about trying to fade out the use of the old group as fast as possible?
> How about sending an automatic daily message to the old list telling people
> no to post any new threads there and move to the new list instead.
> 
> 

I think what almost has to be done (eventually) is disable posting to the newsgroup.  It could remain read only.  Those that do post to the newsgroup could receive an immediate return mail telling them that the newsgroup is no longer available for posting.  The message would refer them to the new newsgroup.  I don't know how hard it would be to implement this, though.

John Reimer wrote:

<snip>
> I think what almost has to be done (eventually) is disable posting to the newsgroup.  It could remain read only.  Those that do post to the newsgroup could receive an immediate return mail telling them that the newsgroup is no longer available for posting.

Immediate return _mail_?  You mean a simple server error wouldn't get through?

The inefficiency of trying to mail attempted posters'll be obvious if you've ever posted under an anti-spam (either munged or container) address.

Stewart.

-- 
My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox, aside from its being the unfortunate victim of intensive mail-bombing at the moment.  Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.

Stewart Gordon wrote:
> John Reimer wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> I think what almost has to be done (eventually) is disable posting to the newsgroup.  It could remain read only.  Those that do post to the newsgroup could receive an immediate return mail telling them that the newsgroup is no longer available for posting.
> 
> 
> Immediate return _mail_?  You mean a simple server error wouldn't get through?
> 
> The inefficiency of trying to mail attempted posters'll be obvious if you've ever posted under an anti-spam (either munged or container) address.
> 
> Stewart.
> 

Of course you're right... I'm afraid I never thought much deeper than 2 centimeters on that one.

Walter wrote:

> It turns out, that the first step in getting the newsgroups here propagated is they have to be renamed.

Ah, mass-marketing. A sign of a dead company. Rember Borland? Walter, surely you can relate. Borland circa 1993. Continued the downhill for 2 decades. Are you on the same path?

OK, no more consulting for D. That's all I have to say. Good luck. Don't kill yourself or anyone else. When you are ready to shut down this IT project gone awry, you can throw me a million dollars and show you how to make money from the ashes.

(I am sooo bad!!!)

AJ wrote:
> Walter wrote:
>
>> It turns out, that the first step in getting the newsgroups here propagated is they have to be renamed.
>
> Ah, mass-marketing. A sign of a dead company. Rember Borland? Walter, surely you can relate. Borland circa 1993. Continued the downhill for 2 decades. Are you on the same path?
>
> OK, no more consulting for D. That's all I have to say. Good luck. Don't kill yourself or anyone else. When you are ready to shut down this IT project gone awry, you can throw me a million dollars and show you how to make money from the ashes.
>
> (I am sooo bad!!!)

I'm serious this time: no more consulting to Mr. D.