🚀 go-pugleaf

As the moderator of comp.sources.reviewed, I can add some more
information to this discussion.

In article <1992Aug12.152145.26416@osf.org> rsalz@osf.org (Rich Salz) writes:
>People on the net have written an amazingly large number of useful packages,
>yet for comp.sources.reviewed:
>    The ratio of administrative articles to sources postings is amazingly high.

Of the 142 postings to the group since its start, 49 (35%) have been
information postings.  The number of information postings has been
reduced recently by combining most of the information into one monthly
posting.  I would think that one monthly information posting is a
minimum.  The problem is not too many information postings, the problem
is not enough source postings.  Read on...
 
>    The number of programs posted per month is amazingly low.

Agreed.

>    The total number of distinct* packages posted is amazingly low.

Agreed. 

>    The percentage of submissions that do not get resubmitted is too high.

Agreed.  As of last count 14/41 (34%) of the submission had been
reviewed and changes had been recommended, but the authors had not
submitted a new version.  The reasons behind this are not known.
Perhaps people are not interested in producing the best software they
can.  I don't believe that the reviews we have been returning have been
unreasonable, but others who have been through the review process
should answer this question.

>    The number of initial submissions is amazingly low.

I think this is the root of the problems that people have been
commenting on.  After operating for about 18 months, we have only
received 41 submissions.  Many news groups have that many postings
every day.  Of those, we have posted 12 (29%), which is probably too
low.  However, another 34% are only being held up by the fact that the
authors have not revised their work and sent it in again.  When
submitters are serious about their software, we are usually able to
complete a couple of rounds of reviews and get things posted within a
few months.

I have posted a Call for Submissions in the past.  Perhaps I should
make this a monthly posting :-)  Seriously, any ideas on how to
increase the number of submissions would be most welcome.

Please let the discussion continue.


-- 
Andrew Patrick, Ph.D.       Communications Research Centre, Ottawa, CANADA
                       andrew@calvin.dgbt.doc.CA
                       
  For a good time, run "telnet debra.dgbt.doc.ca" and login as "chat".