🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1413@bucsb.UUCP> robertl@bucsb.bu.edu (Robert LaFerla) writes:
>I would love to see people post "PostScript" art/programs.  Maybe a new group
>could be formed, comp.sources.postscipt or something similar.
>

Perhaps a more appropriate groups would be comp.examples.postscript?  I
know that I find it a lot easier to do things, once I have seen how
others do them.  Any thoughts?  Anyone want to take the "ball" and run
with it?

In article <687@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP (Kurt L. Reisler) writes:
>Perhaps a more appropriate groups would be comp.examples.postscript?

I like that!  I have some artwork to contribute if the group gets set up.
I'm not an expert at Usenet so I don't think I'd be able to manage it.

   __  
  /  \      /         __/_ BITNET: mete0pc@bostonu.BITNET
 /___/ __  /_  __  __  /   UUCP: robertl@bucsf.bu.edu || robertl@bucsb.bu.edu
/ \   '_' /_/ |_- / ' /

It doesn't seem to be necessary to create a new group for postscript
examples, etc when the volume in this group is low.

Do you expect more traffic just by creating *another* newsgroup?  Is there
a problem with just using *this* group?

Just wondering.


Louis A. Mamakos  WA3YMH    Internet: louie@TRANTOR.UMD.EDU
University of Maryland, Computer Science Center - Systems Programming

There is no need to set up another newsgroup.
Just put the PostScript artwork in this group.
If the volume becomes unmanageable THEN maybe a new group could be formed.

Tom.

In article <687@hadron.UUCP>, klr@hadron.UUCP (Kurt L. Reisler) writes:
> Perhaps a more appropriate groups would be comp.examples.postscript?  I

     A new group would be fine, but it should be clearly named as
a subheading of postscript.  I think a better name would be

     	  comp.lang.postscript.examples



-- 
David S. Hayes, The Merlin of Avalon	PhoneNet:  (202) 694-6900
UUCP:  *!uunet!cos!hqda-ai!merlin	ARPA:  ai01@hios-pent.arpa

In article <687@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP (Kurt L. Reisler) writes:

>Perhaps a more appropriate groups would be comp.examples.postscript?

Or perhaps comp.lang.postscript.examples?
-- 
Robert Claeson, System Administrator, PVAB, Box 4040, S-171 04 Solna, Sweden
eunet: robert@pvab
uucp:  sun!enea!pvab!robert

Once upon a time, PostScript examples were frequent on comp.lang.postscript
Normal rules for newsgroup creation ask that significant traffic be
demonstrated first.  This is hardly the case now.  So just post the
code in this newsgroup...

Jean-Francois Lamy
AI Group, Department of Computer Science           lamy@ai.toronto.edu
University of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4              uunet!ai.toronto.edu!lamy 

In article <1415@bucsb.UUCP>, robertl@bucsb.UUCP (Robert La Ferla) writes:
> In article <687@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP (Kurt L. Reisler) writes:
> >Perhaps a more appropriate groups would be comp.examples.postscript?
> 
> I like that!  I have some artwork to contribute if the group gets set up.
> I'm not an expert at Usenet so I don't think I'd be able to manage it.

Why not just use this group?  I mean, traffic might be high at first,
but it should taper off soon.


-- 
   ____   _______   _____   _______     -------                  Clancy Malloy
  / __ \ |__   __| /   _ \ |__   __|  -====------    Unix System Administrator
 | (__) |   | |    \  \ \_\   | |    -======------               ...!ihlpf!cem
 |  __  |   | |    /   \ __   | |    --====-------             IH 4A-245 x3946
 | |  | |   | |   |  (\ / /   | |     -----------               AT&T Bell Labs
 |_|  |_|   |_|    \_____/    |_|       -------                 Naperville, IL 

>>Perhaps a more appropriate groups would be comp.examples.postscript?
>Or perhaps comp.lang.postscript.examples?

Or maybe just comp.lang.postscript?

If as many people posted postscript examples as suggestions for new newsgroups,
maybe we would have the volume necessary for another newsgroup.

I'm fairly new to postscript I'd rather see code than new groups.

Louis A. Mamakos  WA3YMH    Internet: louie@TRANTOR.UMD.EDU
University of Maryland, Computer Science Center - Systems Programming