[#1263] Draft of the updated Ruby FAQ — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

33 messages 2000/02/08

[#1376] Re: Scripting versus programming — Andrew Hunt <andy@...>

Conrad writes:

13 messages 2000/02/15

[#1508] Ruby/GTK and the mainloop — Ian Main <imain@...>

17 messages 2000/02/19
[#1544] Re: Ruby/GTK and the mainloop — Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...> 2000/02/23

Hello Ian,

[#1550] Re: Ruby/GTK and the mainloop — Ian Main <imain@...> 2000/02/23

On Wed, Feb 23, 2000 at 02:56:10AM -0500, Yasushi Shoji wrote:

[#1516] Ruby: PLEASE use comp.lang.misc for all Ruby programming/technical questions/discussions!!!! — "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>

((FYI: This was sent to the Ruby mail list.))

10 messages 2000/02/19

[#1569] Re: Ruby: constructors, new and initialise — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article

12 messages 2000/02/25

[ruby-talk:01301] Re: Request for discussion (RFD): unmoderated group comp.lang.ruby

From: "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>
Date: 2000-02-10 20:23:21 UTC
List: ruby-talk #1301
From: Dave Thomas <Dave@thomases.com>

> "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@jump.net> writes:

> >                      REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
> >                    unmoderated group comp.lang.ruby
> >
> > This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the creation of of
> > an unmoderated group comp.lang.ruby.  This is not a Call
> > for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time.  Procedural details are
> > below.

> Thanks for organizing this. It's tremendous!

You're welcome.

> Do we have to do anything here, or do we just wait until the CFV?

It would probably be a good idea to watch for (and where prudent, *very*
tactfully participate in) discussions on news.announce.newgroups,
news.groups, comp.lang.perl.misc, comp.lang.python,
comp.lang.java.programmer.

I may have to re-send the RFD again late tonight since it so far hasn't
turned up on any of the target newsgroups (even the unmoderated ones),
although I did get an automated acknowledgement of receipt from the
moderator of news.announce.newsgroups.

One can of worms to try to avoid is that of people wanting changes to the
RFD, which can lead to a potential chain reaction of substantial delays in
getting the newsgroup going due to mandated review cycle times. I've had the
previous version of this RFD review by a couple of the net's newsgroup
volunteers, plus I've looked at a number of previously successful comp.lang
RFDs, so I'm pretty sure that this one is reasonably sufficient for getting
started. The comp.lang.ruby charter can always be changed a year or two from
now, based on actual interim experience.

Conrad




In This Thread

Prev Next