RFD: remove comp.sources.x moderated (LAST CALL FOR COMMENTS)
REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) to remove the moderated
The B8MB plans to begin voting on this proposal after five days. Please
offer any final discussion or comments before the end of this waiting
period. Voting may take up to one week (7 days); a result will be posted
following the end of the voting period.
All discussion of this proposal should be posted to news.groups.
The full (draft) group removal procedure is documented here:
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION:
There were no comments made.
RATIONALE: remove comp.sources.x
The last approved message was in March 1995.
There are other more suitable means of distributing program sources,
so comp.sources.x is not a suitable candidate for conversion to an
The newsgroup comp.sources.x was created in August 1988, with the first
approved message in August 1988. The charter (from the initial welcome
message posted to the group) was:
Welcome to comp.sources.x. This group is intended for software that
runs only on X. I have talked with the moderators of comp.sources.unix
and comp.sources.games and we agree that if the software is of interest
to people that don't use X it should be posted to one of those groups.
If I determine that a posting should be handled in another group, I will
forward it to the moderator and inform the poster.
This document has been posted to the following newsgroups:
Jim Riley <email@example.com>
2006-07-06 2nd RFD (Last Call for Comments)
2006-06-26 RFD posted
2006-06-16 RFD received
Re: RFD: remove comp.sources.x moderated (LAST CALL FOR COMMENTS)
On 6 Jul 2006 18:19:15 -0700, [email]firstname.lastname@example.org[/email] wrote:
>Jim Riley wrote:[color=green]
>> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
>> remove comp.sources.x
>> This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) to remove the moderated
>> newsgroup comp.sources.x.[/color]
>Will this remotion affect web-accessible archives (e.g. Google groups)?[/color]
Google maintains removed newsgroups in their archive. They don't let people post
to them, or at least do not propagate the articles outward.
If you wish to get an X source from 1995, you can get it from Google.
On the other hand, Google archives are probably not the best place to get source
code. Google makes some transformations of articles, for example, obscuring
things that look like e-mail addresses, and you would have to cut the source from
the newsgroup article in the Google archive to get the actual source that could be