First ship to arrive?
in [Visual Studio]
|
From: Larry Serflaten on 19 May 2010 19:36 "dpb" <none(a)non.net> wrote > BTW, anybody of those really involved ever contact the comp.* gurus > about the offer to fasttrack some groups? Or, is it simply going to be > a wait and see thing after all? Not having read any RFD's or anything, I would think adding new groups would be on an 'as needed' basis. And for now, this one group may cover the need... LFS
From: Karl E. Peterson on 19 May 2010 18:57 Larry Serflaten was thinking very hard : > "dpb" <none(a)non.net> wrote > >> BTW, anybody of those really involved ever contact the comp.* gurus >> about the offer to fasttrack some groups? Or, is it simply going to be >> a wait and see thing after all? > > Not having read any RFD's or anything, I would think adding new > groups would be on an 'as needed' basis. And for now, this one group > may cover the need... Certainly, if only the regulars make the migration. <g> I wonder if we need to start spamming "reminders" as well? Maybe some sort of boilerplate response to all their nonsense?
From: Access Developer on 19 May 2010 20:26 This group is the result of a split of comp.lang.basic.visual... it was split into several groups covering database, 3rd party software, etc., but almost all the post came here and over time, all or most of the others died from lack of interest. I haven't had enough interest in VB.NET to check, but if the DotNetters need a group, they can contact the Big 8 Management Board. -- Larry Linson, Microsoft Office Access MVP Co-author: "Microsoft Access Small Business Solutions", published by Wiley Access newsgroup support is alive and well in USENET comp.databases.ms-access "dpb" <none(a)non.net> wrote in message news:ht1fq5$cv3$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > Karl E. Peterson wrote: > ... > >> Right on. It does seem that E-S has a, how to be charitable, "manual" >> system of updating its passwords. I've seen that take anywhere from 6-10 >> hours, so you must've hit 'em when they're awake. <g> Anyway, for we who >> can live with long-term passwords, that shouldn't be an issue. > > I'd presume they simply schedule the 'bot to run on a fixed schedule of > 3-4X/day which, for a free service of something no more critical than > usenet, seems perfectly adequate to me... :) > > BTW, anybody of those really involved ever contact the comp.* gurus about > the offer to fasttrack some groups? Or, is it simply going to be a wait > and see thing after all? > > --
From: dpb on 19 May 2010 20:35 Karl E. Peterson wrote: > dpb formulated on Wednesday : .... >> BTW, anybody of those really involved ever contact the comp.* gurus >> about the offer to fasttrack some groups? Or, is it simply going to >> be a wait and see thing after all? > > Personally, I've yet to hear the need justified. (There, I said it. > <g>) Do we really think this group is going to overflow? .... That was my initial reaction as well. I suppose it wouldn't hurt to "spambot" the MS groups while they're still operational w/ the address of c.l.b.v.m for a modicum of (obviously short term) visibility (other than I presume that the google group archive won't disappear altho that may be a rash assumption, too) 1/Day or every other wouldn't seem too excessive given the soon-to-be-demise I'd think if somebody wanted to do it. --
From: Karl E. Peterson on 19 May 2010 21:16
dpb formulated on Wednesday : > Karl E. Peterson wrote: >> dpb formulated on Wednesday : > ... > >>> BTW, anybody of those really involved ever contact the comp.* gurus about >>> the offer to fasttrack some groups? Or, is it simply going to be a wait >>> and see thing after all? >> >> Personally, I've yet to hear the need justified. (There, I said it. <g>) >> Do we really think this group is going to overflow? > ... > > That was my initial reaction as well. > > I suppose it wouldn't hurt to "spambot" the MS groups while they're still > operational w/ the address of c.l.b.v.m for a modicum of (obviously short > term) visibility (other than I presume that the google group archive won't > disappear altho that may be a rash assumption, too) > > 1/Day or every other wouldn't seem too excessive given the soon-to-be-demise > I'd think if somebody wanted to do it. Makes sense to me. (Along with links to a couple of free providers.) |