From: kvisko@
Subject: GNAT discussions should be here as well.
Date: 1999/03/02
Date: 1999-03-02T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7bgmqm$82v@drn.newsguy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: MJ3xAGKZ#GA.252@pet.hiwaay.net
In article <MJ3xAGKZ#GA.252@pet.hiwaay.net>, "David says...
>
>In your lengthy message (which might have better been submitted to
>chat@gnat.com),
Why?
In Other language newsgroups, such as C/C++/Java, people all the time
ask questions in reference to using specific compilers such as
VC++, Borland , gcc, etc..
No one thinks of saying that each compiler users should have a separate mailing
list. If so, then those news groups will be almost empty.
I think with Ada, with hardly any interest in it from the general public, to
have separate mailing lists for separate compilers is silly and counter
productive.
It is not like this news group is so busy. Even if it were, then this will
be a good thing, not a bad thing.
We should have all Ada discussions here, GNAT or none GNAT. Having separate
mailing lists for Ada related stuff don't make sense to me given the small
Ada community size.
All public Ada discussions should be done here, on any topic, any one can
simply ignore threads they are not interested in. Why are the Ada people
so up-tight about these things? While on other newsgroups no one makes
any point about these things?
May be have some convention of subject, where if the question is on GNAT,
it will say "GNAT: etc..", this way, people can easily not read it if they
do not want to.
kvisko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-03-02 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-03-02 0:00 SGI GNAT Question? (Long) Paul Colvert
1999-03-02 0:00 ` Gautier
1999-03-02 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-03 0:00 ` Paul Colvert
1999-03-03 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-04 0:00 ` SpamSpamSpam
1999-03-04 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-05 0:00 ` SpamSpamSpam
1999-03-05 0:00 ` bourguet
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-05 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-07 0:00 ` root
1999-03-07 0:00 ` David Botton
1999-03-07 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-07 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-08 0:00 ` root
1999-03-09 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-10 0:00 ` SpamSpamSpam
1999-03-10 0:00 ` Chris Morgan
1999-03-10 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-10 0:00 ` Chris Morgan
1999-03-10 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-10 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-09 0:00 ` Some GNAT history (was Re: SGI GNAT Question? (Long)) dewar
1999-03-09 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-09 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-09 0:00 ` Tom Moran
1999-03-11 0:00 ` Arthur Evans Jr
1999-03-11 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-05 0:00 ` SGI GNAT Question? (Long) dennison
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-07 0:00 ` root
1999-03-07 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-08 0:00 ` Marin David Condic
1999-03-05 0:00 ` GNAT Field Test scope (was SGI GNAT Question) Larry Kilgallen
1999-03-04 0:00 ` SGI GNAT Question? (Long) dennison
1999-03-02 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr.
1999-03-02 0:00 ` kvisko [this message]
1999-03-02 0:00 ` GNAT discussions should be here as well Samuel Mize
1999-03-02 0:00 ` Mike Silva
1999-03-02 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-02 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-02 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox