We're getting crowded here. Or, actually, the thread subjects are. Should we split the D group?

I notice D containing some twenty thousand messages, while all the others combined are only some eight thousand.

How about

D.newbies.installation
D.newbies.syntax
D.newbies.general
D.users.using
D.users.programming
D.windows.specific
D.linux.specific
D.devel.bugs
D.devel.compiler
D.devel.language
D.devel.opinions
D.devel.other

Currently the newsgroups list gives the impression that D is just a side thing for Digital Mars.  ;-)

In article <bqt0tm$2nvj$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Georg Wrede says...
>
>We're getting crowded here. Or, actually, the thread subjects are. Should we split the D group?
>
>I notice D containing some twenty thousand messages, while all the others combined are only some eight thousand.
>
>How about
>
>D.newbies.installation
>D.newbies.syntax
>D.newbies.general
>D.users.using
>D.users.programming
>D.windows.specific
>D.linux.specific
>D.devel.bugs
>D.devel.compiler
>D.devel.language
>D.devel.opinions
>D.devel.other
>
I agree that splitting up the news group would be good (as would getting a
better web interface!)

but I think that it should be broken into a few groups so ppl know where to post

D.newbies  --  all newbie question
D.windows  --  windows only stuff
D.linux    --  linux only stuff
D.bugs     --  all bug reports / workarounds etc
D.future   --  all things pertaining to the future of D i.e. syntax changes etc
D.general  --  all other stuff

Mike.

<one_mad_alien@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:bqt3ke$2s78$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> In article <bqt0tm$2nvj$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Georg Wrede says...
> >
>
>
> D.newbies  --  all newbie question
> D.windows  --  windows only stuff
> D.linux    --  linux only stuff
> D.bugs     --  all bug reports / workarounds etc
> D.future   --  all things pertaining to the future of D i.e. syntax
changes etc
> D.general  --  all other stuff
>

Good idea. But even that is too many groups, I think. What if you have a
windows only bug that may just be a question?
I think:

D.bugs        -- compiler bugs only
D.future      -- new language feature or change discussion
D.general    -- everything else: documentation, example code, libraries,
newbie questions, editors, etc. etc..

Dan L.

All great ideas, weve been pushing for seperate groups forever I don think it will ever happen, im pretty sure the  Jan never reads these, think he's in charge of NNTP stuff.

C
"Dan Liebgold" <dliebgold@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bqtd7k$d4q$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> <one_mad_alien@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:bqt3ke$2s78$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > In article <bqt0tm$2nvj$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Georg Wrede says...
> > >
> >
> >
> > D.newbies  --  all newbie question
> > D.windows  --  windows only stuff
> > D.linux    --  linux only stuff
> > D.bugs     --  all bug reports / workarounds etc
> > D.future   --  all things pertaining to the future of D i.e. syntax
> changes etc
> > D.general  --  all other stuff
> >
>
> Good idea. But even that is too many groups, I think. What if you have a
> windows only bug that may just be a question?
> I think:
>
> D.bugs        -- compiler bugs only
> D.future      -- new language feature or change discussion
> D.general    -- everything else: documentation, example code, libraries,
> newbie questions, editors, etc. etc..
>
> Dan L.
>
>
>

Charles Sanders wrote:
> All great ideas, weve been pushing for seperate groups forever I don think
> it will ever happen, im pretty sure the  Jan never reads these, think he's
> in charge of NNTP stuff.
> 

This hasn't happened yet because Walter hasn't been convinced yet.

And I think he's right. (But some we'll need some more groups someday.)

In my mind, the best suggestion yet has been Dan Liebgold's 3 categories:
>>D.bugs    -- compiler bugs only
>>D.future  -- new language feature or change discussion
>>D.general -- everything else: documentation, example code, libraries,
>>newbie questions, editors, etc. etc..

One problem is that even if the definitions are well-defined it can be to figure out what the proper category is.

For example, a person might have some code that won't run.  They start a thread in D.bugs.  Someone replies that it won't run because D doesn't contain that feature.  Then the original poster and others reply to that  post and explain why they should have that feature rather than start a new post in the D.future group.  Often the threads in the current group drift in topic as they go along.

The "Unicode operators" thread turned into "Using Unicode with Newsreader clients" (that was my fault).

"Template instantiation" turned into "$ as array end token".

But eventually as traffic grows, these concerns are less important and the need for more organization overrides the challenges of posting in the right category.  Maybe we're closer to that day than I realize.

Justin

> C
> "Dan Liebgold" <dliebgold@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:bqtd7k$d4q$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> 
>><one_mad_alien@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:bqt3ke$2s78$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>>
>>>In article <bqt0tm$2nvj$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Georg Wrede says...
>>>
>>>
>>>D.newbies  --  all newbie question
>>>D.windows  --  windows only stuff
>>>D.linux    --  linux only stuff
>>>D.bugs     --  all bug reports / workarounds etc
>>>D.future   --  all things pertaining to the future of D i.e. syntax
>>
>>changes etc
>>
>>>D.general  --  all other stuff
>>>
>>
>>Good idea. But even that is too many groups, I think. What if you have a
>>windows only bug that may just be a question?
>>I think:
>>
>>D.bugs        -- compiler bugs only
>>D.future      -- new language feature or change discussion
>>D.general    -- everything else: documentation, example code, libraries,
>>newbie questions, editors, etc. etc..
>>
>>Dan L.

J C Calvarese wrote:

> One problem is that even if the definitions are well-defined it can be to figure out what the proper category is.
>
> For example, a person might have some code that won't run.  They start a thread in D.bugs.  Someone replies that it won't run because D doesn't contain that feature.  Then the original poster and others reply to that  post and explain why they should have that feature rather than start a new post in the D.future group.  Often the threads in the current group drift in topic as they go along.

I agree.  Also keeping this as one group, keeps the D population in one location.  Many of the advanced coders may tend to hang around particular groups and be more likely to miss newbie questions.  Or, as would probably happen, only one of the newsgroups is used allot and so the other groups aren't read (the egg in the chicken thing).

Also, you'd probably get an increase in those annoying (and many-times nasty) "your off topic" replies to threads that are slightly off topic.  Which results in having the exactly the same message posted again the in another group.

-Anderson

Does no-one use irc anymore ?

If we could populate irc.dprogramming.com #d then we could have a realtime place to discuss for newbies and advanced alike.

So come one all!

C


"J Anderson" <REMOVEanderson@badmama.com.au> wrote in message news:br0h2b$2a4e$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> J C Calvarese wrote:
>
> > One problem is that even if the definitions are well-defined it can be to figure out what the proper category is.
> >
> > For example, a person might have some code that won't run.  They start a thread in D.bugs.  Someone replies that it won't run because D doesn't contain that feature.  Then the original poster and others reply to that  post and explain why they should have that feature rather than start a new post in the D.future group.  Often the threads in the current group drift in topic as they go along.
>
> I agree.  Also keeping this as one group, keeps the D population in one location.  Many of the advanced coders may tend to hang around particular groups and be more likely to miss newbie questions.  Or, as would probably happen, only one of the newsgroups is used allot and so the other groups aren't read (the egg in the chicken thing).
>
> Also, you'd probably get an increase in those annoying (and many-times nasty) "your off topic" replies to threads that are slightly off topic. Which results in having the exactly the same message posted again the in another group.
>
> -Anderson
>

In article <br0h2b$2a4e$1@digitaldaemon.com>, J Anderson says...
>
>J C Calvarese wrote:
>
>> One problem is that even if the definitions are well-defined it can be to figure out what the proper category is.
..
>I agree.
..
>Also, you'd probably get an increase in those annoying (and many-times nasty) "your off topic" replies to threads that are slightly off topic.

I know. And knowing that I still suggested splitting this up.
The logic is just that things like "how do I call a C library from D"
and "having multiple return values from functions that consolidate
the returns from an OS specific library" aren't really targeted
for the same audience.

Personally I believe that even the gurus will look at the "trivial" groups once they've read all of their own newsgroup. (It's kinda addictive, no?)

What I'd like is that we'd have an explicit policy that states that it really doesn't matter where you post. So nothing can ever be "in the wrong topic". It's just to get _some_ variety. Like one day you might want to only read the advanced theoretics, and another the newbie questions, depending on your mood. (Chances are that you end up having read all the groups anyway, but this still may bring some structure to D news.)

Another thing is that many of the rookie questions would be answered first by sophomores, which saves quite some typing for the gurus. Of course, the gurus probably would skim the newbie group anyhow, and while at it they'd correct the "wrong" sophomore answers. But still, less typing trivia and more time for the Really Important D Things.

The Sophomores probably won't even feel comfortable answering any kind of questions now while the Ultra Guru Things dominate the topic?

Maybe just two newsgroups?

Georg Wrede wrote:

>We're getting crowded here. Or, actually, the thread subjects are.
>Should we split the D group?
>
>I notice D containing some twenty thousand messages, while
>all the others combined are only some eight thousand.
>
>How about
>
>D.newbies.installation
>D.newbies.syntax
>D.newbies.general
>D.users.using
>D.users.programming
>D.windows.specific
>D.linux.specific
>D.devel.bugs
>D.devel.compiler
>D.devel.language
>D.devel.opinions
>D.devel.other
>
>Currently the newsgroups list gives the impression that D is
>just a side thing for Digital Mars.  ;-)
>
>  
>
What about these 2 groups ;)

D
D.switchstatement

> >We're getting crowded here. Or, actually, the thread subjects are. Should we split the D group?
> >
> >I notice D containing some twenty thousand messages, while all the others combined are only some eight thousand.
> >
> >How about
> >
> >D.newbies.installation
> >D.newbies.syntax
> >D.newbies.general
> >D.users.using
> >D.users.programming
> >D.windows.specific
> >D.linux.specific
> >D.devel.bugs
> >D.devel.compiler
> >D.devel.language
> >D.devel.opinions
> >D.devel.other
> >
> >Currently the newsgroups list gives the impression that D is just a side thing for Digital Mars.  ;-)
> >
> >
> >
> What about these 2 groups ;)
>
> D
> D.switchstatement

LOL!