Idea: create comp.lang.ada.spark - thoughts?

Idea: create comp.lang.ada.spark - thoughts?

[Rod Chapman]

Dear c.l.a

We are considering submitting a Request for Disscussion (RFD) to 
create a new newsgroup: comp.lang.ada.spark

This would be an unmoderated group for general discussion of the SPARK
Ada subset and its uses.  In order for an RFD to be successful there has
to be a general critical-mass of interest (and votes!) to make it
worth-while...

So...what do you think?  Good idea?  Bad idea?  Don't care?

Thanks,
 Rod Chapman, SPARK Team

Re: Idea: create comp.lang.ada.spark - thoughts?

[Lutz Donnerhacke]

* Rod Chapman wrote:
> So...what do you think?  Good idea?  Bad idea?  Don't care?

Bad idea. Spark traffic does not harm in cla itself.

Re: Idea: create comp.lang.ada.spark - thoughts?

[Mark Biggar]

Lutz Donnerhacke wrote:
> * Rod Chapman wrote:
> 
>>So...what do you think?  Good idea?  Bad idea?  Don't care?
> 
> 
> Bad idea. Spark traffic does not harm in cla itself.

Besides the standard rule of thumb here is that if the parent group
isn't actively trying to kick you out, you probably don't have enought
traffic to justify a new sub-group.

-- 
Mark Biggar
mark.a.biggar@attbi.com

Re: Idea: create comp.lang.ada.spark - thoughts?

[Vinzent Hoefler]

Rod Chapman wrote:

> We are considering submitting a Request for Disscussion (RFD) to
> create a new newsgroup: comp.lang.ada.spark
> [...]
> 
> So...what do you think?  Good idea?  Bad idea?  Don't care?

Well, in the moment we probably do not have very much SPARK-related 
traffic, so I would think - like Christoph already suggested -, just 
tag related postings with [SPARK] and see. If there should be a lot of 
traffic one could reconsider the RfD. I don't think, it would make much 
sense at this time.

BTW, when does the new release of John's Book come out? Any news?


Vinzent.

-- 
Abstainer, n.:
        A weak person who yields to the temptation of denying himself a 
pleasure.
                -- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"

Re: Idea: create comp.lang.ada.spark - thoughts?

[Wes Groleau]

> We are considering submitting a Request for Disscussion (RFD) to 
> create a new newsgroup: comp.lang.ada.spark
> 
> So...what do you think?  Good idea?  Bad idea?  Don't care?

I thought the purpose of an RFD was to answer that question,
not to rubber-stamp a decision already made.

Besides, that way won't work.  You can discuss it,
comes to a consensus, and make a decision, but when
you post the RFD (this being Usenet) the discussion
will start all over again.

Re: Idea: create comp.lang.ada.spark - thoughts?

[Jerry Petrey]

Rod Chapman wrote:

> Dear c.l.a
>
> We are considering submitting a Request for Disscussion (RFD) to
> create a new newsgroup: comp.lang.ada.spark
>
> This would be an unmoderated group for general discussion of the SPARK
> Ada subset and its uses.  In order for an RFD to be successful there has
> to be a general critical-mass of interest (and votes!) to make it
> worth-while...
>
> So...what do you think?  Good idea?  Bad idea?  Don't care?
>
> Thanks,
>  Rod Chapman, SPARK Team

I would vote for leaving it in this newsgroup.  SPARK is a lot more on topic
than a lot of the stuff posted here.

Jerry
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Jerry Petrey
-- Senior Principal Systems Engineer - Navigation (GPS/INS), Guidance, &
Control
-- Raytheon Missile Systems          - Member Team Ada & Team Forth
-- NOTE: please remove <NOSPAM> in email address to reply
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Idea: create comp.lang.ada.spark - thoughts?

[Warren W. Gay VE3WWG]

Rod Chapman wrote:
> Dear c.l.a
> 
> We are considering submitting a Request for Disscussion (RFD) to 
> create a new newsgroup: comp.lang.ada.spark
> 
> This would be an unmoderated group for general discussion of the SPARK
> Ada subset and its uses.  In order for an RFD to be successful there has
> to be a general critical-mass of interest (and votes!) to make it
> worth-while...
> 
> So...what do you think?  Good idea?  Bad idea?  Don't care?
> 
> Thanks,
>  Rod Chapman, SPARK Team

I do agree with the other posts in that there hasn't been many
SPARK posts that I've been aware of.

OTOH, I do like the idea of splitting that topic off separately,
because that means that I don't have to skip them if I am trying
to catch up on unread articles. I don't want to filter them out,
because I'll want to go back and read them later (for me, SPARK
has lower priority, but not something I want to eliminate).

With the groups split you can prioritize your reading of the
subject matter, and of course filtering becomes effortless ;-)

Just my $0.02 worth.
-- 
Warren W. Gay VE3WWG
http://home.cogeco.ca/~ve3wwg

Re: create comp.lang.ada.spark - thoughts?

[Steve]

"Rod Chapman" <rod.chapman@praxis-cs.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cf2c6063.0301240322.652bc828@posting.google.com...
> Dear c.l.a
>
> We are considering submitting a Request for Disscussion (RFD) to
> create a new newsgroup: comp.lang.ada.spark
>
> This would be an unmoderated group for general discussion of the SPARK
> Ada subset and its uses.  In order for an RFD to be successful there has
> to be a general critical-mass of interest (and votes!) to make it
> worth-while...
>
> So...what do you think?  Good idea?  Bad idea?  Don't care?

Personally I'd like to see information about SPARK on cla.

I would however like to see separate:

  comp.lang.ada.advocacy

and

  comp.lang.ada.off-topic

newsgroups.  Maybe we could even get Robert Dewar back on cla ;-)

>
> Thanks,
>  Rod Chapman, SPARK Team

Re: create comp.lang.ada.spark - thoughts?

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <ognY9.25841$6G4.6024@sccrnsc02>, "Steve" <nospam_steved94@attbi.com> writes:

> I would however like to see separate:
> 
>   comp.lang.ada.advocacy

That is done on the Team Ada mailing list, where technical questions
are referred to comp.lang.ada .

Re: create comp.lang.ada.spark - thoughts?

[Steve]

"Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote in message
news:TSys4iZCylvt@eisner.encompasserve.org...
> In article <ognY9.25841$6G4.6024@sccrnsc02>, "Steve"
<nospam_steved94@attbi.com> writes:
>
> > I would however like to see separate:
> >
> >   comp.lang.ada.advocacy
>
> That is done on the Team Ada mailing list, where technical questions
> are referred to comp.lang.ada .

Is that team-ada@acm.org?

I would like to know so that I can refer people posting advocacy to cla to
that mailing list.

Thanks,
Steve
(The Duck)

Re: create comp.lang.ada.spark - thoughts?

[Colin Paul Gloster]

"Is that team-ada@acm.org?"

Yes.

RE: Idea: create comp.lang.ada.spark - thoughts?

[Robert C. Leif]

I believe that SPARK belongs on Comp.Lang.Ada. I hope that Ada 0? will
include SPARK or at least the semantics of SPARK as a subset. We could then
have Pragma Restrictions(SPARK).
Bob Leif

-----Original Message-----
From: Rod Chapman [mailto:rod.chapman@praxis-cs.co.uk] 
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 3:22 AM
To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
Subject: Idea: create comp.lang.ada.spark - thoughts?

Dear c.l.a

We are considering submitting a Request for Disscussion (RFD) to 
create a new newsgroup: comp.lang.ada.spark

This would be an unmoderated group for general discussion of the SPARK
Ada subset and its uses.  In order for an RFD to be successful there has
to be a general critical-mass of interest (and votes!) to make it
worth-while...

So...what do you think?  Good idea?  Bad idea?  Don't care?

Thanks,
 Rod Chapman, SPARK Team

Re: Idea: create comp.lang.ada.spark - thoughts?

[chris.danx]

Rod Chapman wrote:
> Dear c.l.a
> 
> We are considering submitting a Request for Disscussion (RFD) to 
> create a new newsgroup: comp.lang.ada.spark
> 
> This would be an unmoderated group for general discussion of the SPARK
> Ada subset and its uses.  In order for an RFD to be successful there has
> to be a general critical-mass of interest (and votes!) to make it
> worth-while...
> 
> So...what do you think?  Good idea?  Bad idea?  Don't care?

I know little of Spark, but in all the time I've been reading (3 years) 
cla I've only ever seen ~10-20 threads on Spark, so I think you'd have a 
hard time convincing people it's necessary.  Of course if Spark traffic 
increased substantially it might be worthwhile but right now it's very low.